\  '^\ 


sS-^^c 


v.^ 


vO^X'^^^.V 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


|50     ■■■ 


M 

2.2 


I.I 


lit 


1^    P-0 


11.25 


^ 

1.4    ii.6 


6' 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


33  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14S80 

(7!i)  87i2-4503 


// 


V. 


r/i 


"^ 


u^ 

^ 


w 


«^ 


^ 


A*^' 


r\^ 


iV 


'V^ 


^\x^^ 


"^ 


^1^* 


^^ 


'^i) 


.f^  J!^^  ..   ^vf 


U.s 


CmM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHiVI/ICiVIH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  micror  jproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notas  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  foi  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  tie 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


r~n    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommagie 

□    Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur^  et/ou  pellicul^e 

□    Cover  title  missing/ 
Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

□    Coloured  maps/ 
Cartes  giographiques  en  couleur 

□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  s,ue  bleue  ou  noire) 

□    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

□    Bound  with  other  material/ 
ReliA  avec  d'autres  documents 


D 


D 


D 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

Lareliure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombro  ou  de  la 
distorsion  le  long  de  la  marge  interieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutdes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  itait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6x6  film^es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppldmentaires: 


L'lnstitut  a  microfilm*  le  meilleur  axemplaire 
quil  lui  a  «t«  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique.  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m«thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dessous. 


I     1    Coloured  pages/ 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endomniag^es 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restauries  et/ou  pelliculdes 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxsu. 
Pages  ddcolor^es,  tachet^es  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tachies 


I  I  Pages  damaged/ 

I  I  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

I  I  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxsd/ 

I  I  Pages  detached/ 


0Showthrough/ 
Tri 


ransparence 


□    Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Quality  indgale  de  I'impression 

□    Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comorend  du  material  «iinniAi<... 


Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


n 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc..  ont  dt*  filmies  6  nouveau  de  facon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu«  ci-dessous. 

JOX  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


12X 


16X 


30X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Douglas  Library 
Queen's  University 

The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — ^-  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED "),  or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

IMaps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  iiiustrste  the 
method: 


L'exemplaire  film*  fut  reproduit  grAce  6  la 
gAnArosit*  de: 

Douglas  Library 
Queen's  University 

Les  images  suivantes  ont  4t6  reproduites  avec  ie 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettetA  de  l'exemplaire  filmd,  et  en 
cortformit*  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprim«e  sont  filnr\«s  en  commenpant 
par  Ie  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  la  second 
plat,  selon  Ie  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  fiim^s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparattra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  seion  Ie 
cas:  Ie  symbols  —^  signifie  "A  SUIVRE  ",  Ie 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
fiimds  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Lorsque  ie  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  cliche,  il  est  film6  d  partir 
de  "angle  sup^rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  Ie  nombre 
d'images  ndcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  m^thode. 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

mmmm 


FACTS 


AND 


¥*» 


DOCUMENTS, 


RELATING   TO    THE 


STATE  OF  THE  CONTROVERSY, 


BETWEEN 


i  MERIC A   AND   GREAT  BRITAIN  ;     . 


AMP   THfi 


DISPOSITIONS 


OF   THfi 


TWO  CABIJ^ETS  TO  MAKE  F RACE, 


Collected  for  the  use  of  the  America^,  j^ople. 


JBec 

1 


m 


BY  A  FRIEND  OF  TRUTH, 

AND    OF  HONORABLE  PEACE. 


M 


* 


BOSTON ; 

TRUE    &    ROWE    PRINTERS. 
1813. 


m. 


L 


E_3si.ri^ 


0f 


#' 


i 


l^    ' 


FACTS  AND  nOCUaiENTS,  *;c. 


Extract  of  a  letter  from  Thomas  Jefferson,  Esq.  secretary  of  state,  under  the  i't- 
rrctiofi  0/  George  Washington,  President  of  the  United  States,  to  7T>omas 
Pinckvey,  minister  plenipotentiary  of  the  United  States  at  London,  dated 

"DEPARTMENT   OF   STATE— JFUI^Y  U,  1792, 

"THE  peculiar  custom  in  England  of  Impressing  Sea- 
men on  every  appearance  of  war,  will  occasionally  expose 
our  seamen  to  peculiar  oppressions  and  vexations.  It  wUl  be 
expedient  that  you  take  proper  opportunities,  in  the  mean 
time,  of  conferring  with  the  minister  on  this  subject,  \sk  or- 
der to  form  some  arrangement  for  the  protection  of  our  sea- 
I  men  on  those  occasions.  We  entirely  reject  the  nM)de  which 
was  the  subject  of  a  conversation  between  Mr.  Morris  and  him, 
which  was,  that  our  seamen  should  always  carry  about  them 
certificates  of  their  citizenship  :  This  is  a  condition  never  yet 
submitted  to  by  any  nation  s  one  with  which  seamen  would 
never  have  the  precaution  to  comply :  the  casualties  of  their 
calling  would  expose  them  to  the  constant  destruction  or  loss 
of  this  paper  evidence,  and  thus  the  British  government  would 
be  armed  with  iegal  authority  to  impress  the  whole  of  our 
seamen.  The  simplest  rule  will  be,  that  the  vessel  being  A- 
merican,  shall  be  evidence  that  the  seamen  on  board  her  are 
such.  If  they  apprehend  that  our  vessels  might  thus  become 
asylums  for  the  fugitives  of  their  own  nation  from  impress 
gangs,  the  number  of  men  to  be  protected  by  a  vessel  may 
be  limited  by  her  tonnage,  and  one  or  two  officers  only  be 
permitted  to  enter  the  vessel  in  order  to  examine  the  number 
on  board  ;  but  no  press  gang  should  be  allowed  ever  to  go 
on  board  an  American  vessel,  till  after  it  shall  be  found  that 
there  are  more  than  their  stipulated  number  on  board,  nor  till 
4ifter  the  master  shall  have  refused  to  deliver  the  supernume- 
raries (to  be  named  by  himself)  to  the  press  officer  who  has 
come  on  board  for  that  purpose ;  and  even  then  the  Amerittin 
consul  shall  be  called  in.  In  order  to  urge  a  settlement  of 
this  point  before  a  new  occasion  may  arise,  it  may  not  be 
amiss  to  draw  their  attention  to  the  peculiar  irritation  excited  on 
the  last  ocvasiofty  and  the  difficulty  of  avoiding  our  making 
immediate  ret>risnh  on  their  seamefi  here^  You  will  be  so  good 
as  to  communicate  to  me  what  shall  pass  on  this  subject,  and 
it  may  be  made  an  article  of  convention  to  be  entered  inta 
either  there  or  here." 

176015 


^t,!?.."  r",*!?-  ''°".  *  "P''  "''  *  '"'"  f™™   Mcffrs.  Blow  &  Melhaddo   m.r 
coait  ot  Atriea,  by  the  commander  of  a  Britifh  armed  vefTe)       q«  J^        • 

a«>  oM.r  nation.  No  law  forbids  the  seamen  of  any  couJrZ 
engage,  m  time  of  peace,  on  board  a  foreign  -vestel  ;  no  law 
""hor.ses  such  seaman  to  break  his  contract,  nor  the  armed -^Z 
sets  of  his  nation  to  interpose  force  for  his  rescue."* 


^fffract from  the  instructions  given  bv   Timothv  P'irh/>,;«rr   «,^    • 

«A.on,  the  angles  left  una'^^Jf  l^L^oiMn^-erea^.^l^tre 
on^th?!, V^P'f  "2  of  American  feamen.     Mr,  Pinckney  ,vas  fnftruaed 

Briufh  imprefTes,  prove  that  the  fubjed  is  in  its  nature  difficult. 

«;  i  f  *"*  j""P^^ft  "»^^»  as  remarked  to  Mr.  Pinckney,  would  be,  that  t/je  t,es 

hnfi^  nf  \"  •"^P"''^^"'  P°'»t  g-'^'n'^d,  if,  on  the  /S;]^^  seas,  our  flag  can  proted 
z^tfrZ      """"'^T'^'r^^^^^^^^  ^"^  for  th:s,hur^a„ity  as  u^l    - 

the  r  flfl^v  P'^T'"^""^  Pj^^''-  J^^^'-'^.h^"^  vefTels  c.rry  no  more  ha.^s  than 
exDofe  ho7h  T  '  T'^"'^-  T^-A^hdraw  any  of  chem  on  the  ocean,  is  to 
pea  tha^ThVr-V'.'^  ^"""^'''^  '°  deftruaion.  We  have  a  right  then  to  ex. 
pea  that  the  British  government  will  make  no  difficulty  in  acceding  to  this 
very  ,ntereft,ng  provifion  Aud  the  fame  r.otives  fhould  operaTe.  wfth  nea 
ly  equal  force,  to  procure  for  us  the  like  exemption  in  all  ii  Brit  (hco  oT^ 
but  efpeaally  in  the  Weft  Indies.     la  the  latter,  the  confeoue  ce  of    H^^^^ 

ddtroyed  by  the  worms,  and  the  remnant  of  the  crewr  cxpofcd  to  the  fatal 
5:!'^Lll^f-f-     Hence  a  longer  detention  eniue's  ;  the  vovl.e  he 
^•^-.=..=  .nprt^iiraole,  ir  not  runious  to  the  merchant,  and   liumanitv    c'enlores 
the  loft  of  many  valuable  lives.     But  there  is  another  cogenTSon  fc     t  V 
abfolute  exemption  from  rmpreffes  in  the  Britifh  colonies.  S^hattheV:^^^ 

,  as  1.  always  has  been,  attended  with  inonftrous  abufes  :  and  the"  ia. 


premt 
even  1 
zens, 
nies,  r 
any  a( 
In  th( 
found 
contrc 
promj 
be  mi, 


Mr.  p 

»'I( 

.     folk,  r 

candoi 

(Wem 

an  enc 

fixed  i 

tion  ar 

quiries 

seamer 

J    to  mak 

iiess  to 

rights, 

British 

tion  of 

the  ide 

and  TE 

,^  other  tl 

any  res 

f  will  ev£ 

;^  The  sul 

'   but  tiie 

your  spi 


% 


1 


Rufus  I 


*   Byth 

.ialso  presid 

i  oi  the  opii 

J  tries,  upyn 


will 


m 


I 


'State,  under 
ted  States,  to 
i  at  London, 

liaddo,  mer- 
ilors,  on  the 
So  many  jn- 
Vl  their  gov- 
difavow  and 
)r  to  obtain 
ft  likely  to 
:  protedlion 
need  from 
".ountry  to 
y  no  law 
rmed  ves- 


roN,  when  he 
ipute  between 
ind  to  impress 
d. 


Secretary  of 
ited  States^ 

8,  1796. 
ing  nature 
5  inftrucRed 
prefcrihed 
reprohi^ted. 
;hem  from 

\^tthe  'ves- 
ucJ!>.      But 
an  protedl 
ity  as  well  • 
aiids  than 
:ean,  is  to 
ben  to  ex- 
ig   to  this 
^ith  near- 
I  colonits, 
:3f  an  im- 
njiircd  or 

the  fatal 
)Vaye  he- 

deplores 
1  for  the 

practice 
d  the-liu 


5 

preme  power  is  fo  remote,  the  evils  become  irremediable  before  rcdrefi  can 
even  be  fought  for.     To  guard  againft  abufe.  on  the  part  of  American  I? 
/.ens,  every  mafter  of  a  vefTel,  on  his  arrival  in  any  port  of  he  Br Scob 
n.es.  may  be  required  to  report  his  crew  at  the  proper  office      If  a    erward; 
any  addmon  be  made  to  them  by  Briti/h  fuhjccl  ihefe  may  be  taken  away 

fn,    H     ^K      f   ^'"'n-  ?"'"•"  ^^"^  ^^^'^"^'  ^he  impref.  of  BrS TbUcU 
found  on  board  our  veffels  muft  doubtlefs  be  admitted.     But  thraXodd   U 
controlled  by  regulations  to  p.event  infults  and  injuries,  and  to  adm  nider 
prompt  rehef  where  Amencan  citizens  (which  will  alfuredly  iLptn  tal 
be  miilaken  for  Btitifh  fubjects.  ^  "appen;  man 


Mr.  ftckertng   under  the  dnecthn  of  president  Washington,  to  Mr   Kin^ 
al  «„  /'^'^''-"''"ARTMENT  OF  STATE.   September  10.  ,796  ^' 

fl     T    ''  ^^T^'^'^^  Francis  S.  Taylor/deputy  collector  of  Nor- 
folk relative  to  four  impressed  seamen.     It  appears  to  be  written  with 
candor,  and   merits  attention.     If,  as  the  captain  of  the   Prevovrnte 
(Wemyss)  s.yst).e  dignity  of  the  British  government  will  not  perm  ' 
.n  enquiry  on  board  their  ships  for   AmerLn  seamen,  terrdoon" 
fixed  lor  the  war  :  and  thus  the  rights  of  an  independent  neuSn  a 
tlonare  to  be  sacrificed  Xo  British  dt^ty  i  Justice  requires   harsucMn 
quines  and  examinations  should  be  made,  because  the  libe  atTon  of  our" 
seamen  will  otherwise  be  impossible.     For  the  British  government  then 

ri.l  .     ,         •      f  •'"'  '"^  y^'  ^^""y  *'^^  °"^y  '"^^n«  of  ascertaining  thofe 
nghts  IS  an  insulting  tantalism.     If  such  orders  have  been  given^o  the 
British  commanders,  (and  Mr.  Liston's  communication,  in  the  conversa 
jon  of  which  I  sent  you  a  copy  in  my  letter  of  the  31st  i  t    oltenance; 
the  Idea)  the  agency  of  Col.  Talbot  and  Mr.  Trumbull  wi^be  Se« 

and  THE  SOONER  WE  KNOW  IT  THE    BETTFR  *       R.,^/  "" ''\5V^"\"eSS, 

other  ,hi„gs,  and  if  .heBrithh  g^nrnlh^^e  .n'^'eLr.o  o-" '1^ 
any  respec.  for  our  nation,  .nd  place  any  value  on'^ur  Kendsh  0  fhev 

r>  r     zr-      (J^'gne^^)  TIMOTHY  PICKERINP 

^  Rufus  King,  Esq.  esV.  eSJV.  rn^JllLKliNG. 

■  1*  ■ 

:{^ni^  opinion,  tha    aCoSt  J  W  S ,      "'"/T  *!''  ^«"  «-« -"tte„.  we.eboth 
..^tries,  upon  the  subject  of  l^„,T'  '  ^  "°""  '''''  ^'^^  •^^^"'^^"  *''«  »-"  ----' 


■i 


'i*        "   I   fhmU    ^        -^    '^«'5'/—     OEPAKTMENT  OF   STATE,  October  26    1 79fi 

Or«/.;  .     i  lUA  HAVE  EVEN  SOMETIMES  IMPRESSED  FRENCH- 


t. 


MEN.  If  there  should  be  time  to  make  out  a  copy  of  a  protest  lately  re- 
ceived, it  shall  be  enclosed,  describing  the  impress  of  a  Dane  and  a  Portu- 
^guese-  This  surely  is  an  abuse  easy  to  correct.  They  cannot  pretend  an 
inability  to  distinguish  these  foreigners  from  their  own  subjects:  and  they 
may  with  as  much  reason  rob  American  vessels  of  the  property  or  mer- 
chandize of  Swedes,  Danes  and  Portuguese,  as  seize  and  detain  in  their 
service  the  subjects  of  those  nations  found  on  boa*  d  American  vessels. 
The  president  is  extremely  anxious  to  have  this  uusiness  of  impresses 
placed  on  a  reasonable  footing." 


£.xtraetof  a  letter  frnm  Mr.  Pickering,  secretary  of  state,  under  the  dircahn  of 
■president  Adams,  to  Silas  falbot,  esquire. 

»«DEPARTMENT   OF    STATE AugUSt  15,  1797. 

«»I  was  pleased  with  your  success  in  obtaining  relief  for  so  many  A- 
merican  seamen,  as  mentioned  in  your  several  letters  :  but  your  laft, 
containing  the  orders  of  Admiral  Parker  to  his  captains  m  lottger  to  obey 
the  writs  of  habeas  corpus^  gave  me  much  tmeasiness.  Yesterday  I  gave 
those  letters  to  the  British  minister,  Mr.  Liston  ;  and  wish  he  may  do 
something  to  afford  you  a  prospect  of  further  success :  but  I  fear,  not- 
withstanding he  is  perfectly  well  disposed  to  administer  relief,  that  his 
remonftrances  or  requefts  will  have  too  little  effect.  I  ihall  transmit 
copies  of  these  letters  to  Mr.  King,  our  minister  in  London,  to  lay  be- 
fore the  British  ministry,  if  any  naval  officers  shall  have  committed  such 
an  outrage  on  any  American  seaman  as  to  bring  them  to  the  gatigwayy  as 
you  mention,  or  to  inflict  any  kind  of  punishment  on  the  i,  especially 
for  seeking  opportunities  to  inform  you  f  thar  situation^  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  the  just  relief  to  which  they  are  entitled,  pray  endeavor  to 
get  proper  proofs  of  the  fa£l,  that  I  may  make  it  the  subject  of  a  spe- 
cial representation  to  the  British  governmem." 


Extract  of  a  letter  to  R\iia%  King,  esquire,  frefn  tie  secretary  tf  slate,  dated-^ 

"TRENTON,  October  8  1797, 
"Lord  Grenville's  observations  on  the  a^  of  Congress  for  the  relief 
and  protection  of  American  seamen,  present  difficuhies  which  demand 
consideration  at  the  ensuing  seffion.  But  your  reasoning,  in  your  let- 
ter to  his  lordship  of  the  30th  of  laft  November,  is  conclusive  against 
the  British  pretences  to  retain  real  American  seamen  who  are  married  in 
their  dominions,  or  who  have  voluntarily  entered  on  board  British  ves- 
sels. //  behoves  the  honor  and  faith  of  the  Britlh  government  to  adhere  to 
iheir  principle  on  natural  allegiance  ivholly^  or  to  renounce  it  ivhotly  :  and  an 
answer  on  this  point  would  have  become  his  lordship's  candor. 

I    consider  colonel  Talbot's  agency   in  the  West  Indies  to  be  no 


C( 


longer  verv  imnnrf-anf. 


agency 

1   no   rtrrirl    mnrlni-f    r»r  orli-riirol   c!r    Hw/^o 


er,  (who  from  the  beginning  has  thrown  obftacles  in  the  way)  leaves 
but  little  room  to  get  our  seamen  released.  The  oppofition  of  the  of- 
f  cers  in  general,  induced  col.  Talbot  to  take  out  writs  of  habeas  cor- 


pus at 
ed  the 
time  p 
lalbot 
ATTEl^ 
TION. 

not  to 
their  \ 
every  < 
are  a  tic 


The  Sec 

The 
Mr. 
treaty  ft 
retary  i 
Mr.  Lil 
express 
quently 


*  Byt 
ering  '■'un 
of  a  treaty 

■and  Mput 


Extract  0 
King,  ■ 

"The 

liitude,  ■■ 

\    "This 

who  eng 

'I    "No  r 

|hey  are  i 

|he  evide 

to  serve, 

iThese  mi 

In  the  m 

if  the  U, 

foreign  se 

|heir  disci 

th  unrelii 
ijurious  i 
'    "It  is  tl 
aeasures 


test  lately  rc- 
'  and  a  Portu- 
ot  pretend  an 
sets:  and  they 
perty  or  mer- 
etain  in  their 
irican  vessels, 
of  impresses 


he  direerhn  of 

15,  1797., 
'  so  many  A- 
ut  your  laft, 
I  longer  to  obey 
erday  I  gave 
L  he  may  do 
I  fear,  not- 
ief,  that  his 
lall  transmit 
I,   to  lay  be- 
nmitted  such 
^angwayf  as 
I,   especially 
;  purpose  of 
endeavor  to 
;ct  of  a  spe- 


8     1797, 

or  the  relief 
ich  demand 
in  your  let- 
isive  against 
e  married  in 
British  ves- 
t  to  adhere  to 
tly  :  and  an 
)r. 
ies  to  be  no 


Kzy)  leaves 
1  of  the  of- 
habeas  cor- 


pus at  Jamaica,  by  which,  directly,  or  in  their  consequences,  he  obtairr- 
ed  the  discharge  of  near  fifty  seamen  ;  but  admiral  Parker  has  seme 
time  paj}  prbidden  ha  officers  to  pay  any  obedien,-e  to  such  -writs  ;  and  coL 
lalbot  informs  me  that  some  of  our  seamen  have  been  punished  for 

ATTEMPTING  TO  SEND  LETTERS  TO  HIM  TO  INFORM  OF  THEIR  SITUA- 

•riON.  Mr.  Lifton  has  aflured  me  that  the  Britifh  officers  have  orders 
not  to  impress  any  American  seamen,  and  of  course  not  to  retain  againft 
their  will  any  already  impressed  :  but  if  they  perfift  in  obftruainc 
every  channel  of  information  and  proof  of  their  citizenihip,  such  orders 
are  and  w///  continue  deceptive^* 


Tht  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Pre/,  dent  of  the  United  ^/«/^j.-department  oir 

STATE—Fcbniary,  20,  1800. 
Ihe  secretary  has  the  honor  to  lay  before  the  prefident— 
Mr.  Lifton's  note  of  the  *th  February,  together  with  his  project  of  a 
treaty  for  the  reciprocal  delivery  of  deserters ;  which  appears  to  thesec>- 
Texzvy  utterly  ttiadtnijfihk,  unless  it  would  put  an  end  to  impressments,  which 
Mr.  Lifton  seemed  to  imagine,  while  the  7th  paragraph  of  his  project 
expressly  recognizes  the  right  of  imprefling  Britifh  subjects,  and  conse- 
quently  American  citizens,  as  at  present. 

(Signed)  TIMOTHY  PICKERING.* 

\rL  -^.SiL**/""!1 """  *''"!  "'^  *'"*^  ^'"^  ^"g'''"^  '^'^"'^  ^  satisfHctory  to  Mr.  Pick-  ' 
SaieatC^^  w,r»h^^'V'"         r'^r"^'''^-'^    ^"^  "'"'  in  hi.  opinion,  every  ''project 


Binact  Df  a  letter  frtn  Jchti  Marshall,   esaulre' tecreiarv  o/,,^,-   ..  d   r 

K,„g,  „>,i„er  t'enip,ten,Ury  oftte'  ule/st/tesTio/dTjJ'e^^l'"" 
■     „TL„  •  ,    "DEPAHTMEKT  OF  8TATE— September  20,  1800 

"lhe.mpressmentof  our  seamen  i.  an  injury  oi  very  serious  ma„ 

«itude,  wh,ch  deeply  affefts  the  feelings  and  the  honor^      "naS" 
j^  "Th,s  valuable  class  of  men  is  composed  of  natives  and  foreigner; 
,  who  engage  voluntarily  in  our  service.  "reigners 

^  "No  right  has  been  asserted  to  impress  the  natives  of  America  Yet 
|hey  are  .mpressed,  they  ara  dragged  on  board  British  shiprof  wa  „Tth 
|he  evidence  of  citizenship  in  their  hands,  and  forced  by  xllence  there 

Tl-tr''  «""'  T''"""'^f'*''"'>"'^'=  °f  "'"'  birth  can^be  obra?ned  I! 
These  mull  mod  generally  be  sought  for  on  this  side  the  Athm^ 
|n    he  mean  t.me  acknowledged  violence  is  practised  on  "c Wz  „" 

"It  IS  the  duty  as  well  as  the  right  of  a  frien.lly  nation,  to  require  that 
.«sures  be  taken  by  the  British  govern„,e„t  to  preven't  "he  continued 


TT 


I'? 


If] 


8 

l^e|ietUion  of  such  violence  by  its  agents.  This  can  only  be  clone  bv 
punishing  and  frowning  on  those  who  perpetrate  it.  The  mere  release 
of  the  injured,  after  a  long  course  of  service  and  of  sulicring,  is  no 
compensation  for  the  pafl,  and  no  security  for  the  future.  It  is  impos- 
sible not  to  believe,  that  the  decisive  interference  of  the  government  in 
this  respe<i\,  would  prevent  a  prafkice,  the  continuance  of  nviyuh  muji  in- 
evitably  produce  discord  beiween  two  nations  which  ought  to  be  the  friends 
of  each  other. 

"Those  seamen  who,  born  in  a  foreign  country,  have  been  adopted 
by  this,  were  cither  the  subje£ls  of  Britain  or  some  other  power. 

"The  right  to  impress  those  who  were  Britilh  subjedls  has  been  as- 
serted, and  the  right  to  impress  those  of  every  other  nation  has  not 
been  disclaimed. 

"  Neither  the  one  practice  nor  the  other  can  be  jujlijied. 

"  With  the  naturalization  of  foreigners,  no  other  nation  can  inter- 
fere further  than  the  rights  of  that  other  are  affected.  The  rights  of 
Britain  are  certainly  not  affected  by  the  naturalization  of  other  than 
British  subjects.  Consequently  those  persons  who,  according  to  bur 
laws,  are  citizens,  muft  be  so  considered  by  Britain,  and  by  every  other 
power  not  having  a  conflicting  claim  to  the  person. 

"The  UnitcdStates  therefore  require  positively,  that  their  seamen, 
wIk)  are  not  British  subjeilts,  whether  born  in  America  or  elsewhere, 
shall  be  exempt  from  imprelTments. 

"The  case  of  Britifh  subjects,  Avhether  naturalized  or  not,  is  more 
queftionable  ;  but  the  right  even  to  impress  th^m  is  denied.  The  prac- 
tice of  the  Britijh  government  itself  may  certainly  in.  a  controversy ^  with 
that  government f  be  relied  on.  The  privileges  it  claims  and  exercises  ought  to 
be  ceded  to  others.  To  deny  this  would  be  to  deny  the  equality  of  nations,  and 
to  make  it  a  question  of  power  and  not  of  right. 

*«  If  the  practice  of  the  British  government  may  be  quoted,  that  practice  is 
to  maintain  and  defend  in  their  sea  service,  all  those,  of  any  nation,  who  have 
voluntarily  engaged  in  it,  or  who,  according  to  their  laws,  have  become  Brit  if* 
subjects, 

"  Alien  seamen,  not  Britifh  subjects,  engaged  in  our  merchant  ser- 
vice, ought  to  be  equally  exempt  with  citizens  from  imprefTments  :  we 
have  a  right  to  engage  them,  and  have  a  right  to  and  an  interefk  in  their 
persons  to  the  extent  of  the  service  contracted  to  be  performed.  Britain 
has  no  pretext  of  right  to  their  persons  or  to  their  service.  To  tear 
them,  then,  from  our  pofTeftion,  is  at  the  same  time  an  insult  and  an  in- 
jury.    It  is  an  act  of  violence  for  which  there  exifls  no  paliative. 

"  We  know  well  that  the  difficulty  of  distinguifhing  between  native 
Americans  and  Britifh  subjects  has  been  used,  with  respect  to  natives, 
as  an  apology  for  the  injuries  complained  of.  It  is  not  pretended  that 
this  apology  can  be  extended  to  the  case  of  foi'eigners,  and  even  with 
respect  to  natives  we  doubt  the  exiftence  of  the  difficulty  alleged.  We 
know  well  that  amono"  that  class  of  neonle  who  are  seamen,  wg  can 
readily  diflinguifh  between  a  native  American  and  a  person  raisedHo 
manhood  in  Great  Britain  or  Ireland ;  and  we  do  not  perceive  any  reas-; 
he  capacity  of  making  this  diflinction  Ihould  not  be  pofTefTedj 


'I 


7  be  clone  bv 
mere  release 
fcring,  is  no 
It  is  impos- 
overnnient  in 
which  intiji  in- 
)e  the  friends 

been  adopted 

lower. 

1  has  been  as- 

ition   has  not 


ion  can  mter- 
rhe  rights  of 
f  other  than 
rding  to  bur 
r  every  other 

their  seamen, 
or  elsewhere, 

not,  is  more 
d.     The  prac. 
roversyj  with 
frcises  ought  to  ' 
f  natiens,  and 


hat  practice  is    f 
tioftj  nvhohave. 
become  BritiJI-f     . 


nerchant  ser- 
siTments  :  we 
tereft  in  their 
Tied.  Britain 
ice.  To  tear 
lit  and  an  in- 
liative. 

Jtween  native 
ict  to  natives, 
retended.  that 
id  even  with 
lUeged.  We 
men.  wg  can. 
son  raisedHo 
eive  any  reas- 
t  be  pofTeiTedl 


.f 


9 

•'If,  tliereforc,  no  regulation  can  be  formad  which  (hall  efFectually 
secure  all  seamen  on  board  American  merchantmen,  we  have  a  rirrht  to 
expect  from  the  justice  of  tl  BritiOi  government,  from  its  regard  for 
the  fnendlhip  of  the  United  States  and  its  own  honor,  that  it  will  man- 
ifeft  the  sincerity  of  its  willies  to  repress  this  offence,  by  nunifhinc 
those  who  commit  it.  Jib 

«*  We  hope,  however,  that  an  agreement  may  be  entered  into  satis- 
factory and  beneficial  to  both  parties.  The  article  which  appears  to 
have  been  transmitted  by  mypredeceiror,  while  it  satisfies  this  country, 
will  probably  restore  to  the  naval  service  of  Britain  a  greater  number  of 
seamen  than  will  be  loft  by  It.  Should  we  even  be  miftaken  in  this 
calculation.yetthe  difterence  cannot  be  put  in  competition  witfi  the  mis- 
chief which  may  result  from  the  irritation  juftly  excited,  by  this  prac- 
tice, throughout  the  United  States.  The  extent  and  the  juftice  of  the 
resentments  it  produces,  may  be  eftimated,  in  Britain,  by  inquiring 
what  impreffions  would  be  made  on  them  by  similar  conduct  en  the 
part  of  this  government. 

"  Should  we  impress  from  the  merchant  service  of  Britain,  not  only 
Americans  but  foreigners,  and  even  Britifli  subjefts,  how  long  woula 
such  a  course  of  injury  unredressed  be  permitted  to  pass  unrevenged  .? 
How  long  would  the  government  be  content  with  unsuccessful  remon- 
ftrance  and  unav  .iling  memorials  ?  I  believe,  sir,  that  only  the  most 
prompt  correaion  of,  compensation  for,  the  abuse,  would  be  admitted 
as  satisfaction  in  such  a  case. 

"If  the  principles  of  this  government  forbid  it  to  retaliate  by  impress- 
ments, there  is  yet  another  mode  which  might  be  resorted  to.  We 
might  authorize  our  ships  of  war,  though  not  to  impress,  yet  to  recruit 
sailors  on  board  British  merchantmen.  Such  are  the  inducements  to 
enter  into  our  naval  service  that  wc  believe  even  this  praftice  would 
very  seriously  afFe<St  the  navigation  of  Britain.  How,  sir,  would  it  be 
received  by  the  Britiih  nation  .? 

«« Is  it  not  more  advisable  to  defift  from,  and  to  take  effectual  meas- 
ures to  prevent,  an  acknowledged  wrong,  than  by  perseverance  in  that 
^  wrong  to  excite  again/}  themselves  the  well  founded  resentments  of  America, 
and  force  our  government  into  measures  which  may  very  pojftbly  terminate  in 
an  open  rupture"  ^       ^^.u    j 

Extraa  of  a  nete  from  Mr.  King,  minlfter  plenipotentiary  of  the  United  States 
at  London,  to  lord  Grenville,  dated—*'  London,  Great  Cumberland  Place- 
November  30,  179v 
«  Ih  your  lordfhip's  letter  of  the  21ft  of  September,  in  ?nswer  to  my 
application  for  the  discharge  of  Maxwell,  an  American  citizen,  impres- 
sed and  detained  on  board  his-  majefty's  fhip  Sandwich,  the  reason  as- 
signed agaiaft  his  discharge  is  «« that  he  is  married  and  settled  at  Bris- 
tol i '  anu  I  underftand  that  the  orders  of  the  lords  commiflioners  of 
the  admiralty  for  the  discharge  of  American  teamen  usually  contain  a 
proviso,  that  the  discharge  is  not  to  operate  in  favor  of  any  person  who 
has  entered  on  board  of  any  of  liis  majesty's  ftiips,  or  who  is  married  or 
settled  within  any  of  his  majesty's  dominions.     Without  admitting,  or 
contesting,  on  this  occasion,  the  rule  of  English  lawt  that  a  subiea  can- 


.10 

not  divest  himself  of  his  natural  allegiance,  I  take  the  liberty  to  requeft 
your  lordship's  attention  to  the  diversity  of  pra<?ace,  so  much  to  the  dis- 
advantage Of  the  American  citizens,  that  prcva)\s  in  the  eophcation  of 

«If  Great  Britain  requires  the  acquiescence  of  foreign  -^f  t^<^"f  ;"  J}"^ 
law.  so  far  as  regards  the  requisition  of  her  subjefts  married  and  settled 
IbT;  d,  or  voluntarily  engaged  in  foreign  service,  rj  she  not  bound  to   h 
serve  it  in  like  manner  herself,  in  respect  to  the  suhjeBs  of  foretgn  powers, 
under  similar  circumstances,  in  her  service  or  within  her  dominions?     It  to 
Z  demand  of  a  foreigner  in  her  service  by  the  -^J^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
belongs,  Great  Britain  answers,  that  such  foreigner  cannot  be  delivered, 
b    aufe  he  has  voluntarily  engaged  to  serve  his  jnajefty,  or  i^s  marred 
or  is  settled  within  his  majesty's  -iomlnions,  is  she  not  bound  by  her 
own  principles  to  admk  the  validity  of  the  same  answer  trom  such  ^^^^^^^ 
eign  nation,  when  she  requires  the  surrender  of  British  ^ubjf  s  f^^^^^^^ 
in  a  fimilar  predicament  in  ihe  service  or  within  the  ^  /ritory  of  such 
foreign  natiin  ?     Justice,  which  is  always  impartial,  furnishes  the  prop- 

er  answer  to  these  questions.  ^         a 

"Sting,  then,  that  the  vok  .tary  contract  of  an  American  oti- 
zen  to  e"ve  oA  board  a  British  ship,  or  the  marriage  or  settlement  of 
"ch  :  ddzen  within  his  majefty's  dLinions,  is  the  foun toon  f^^^^ 
in  his  majefty's  government  to  refuse  the  requifition  of  the  IJnited 
States  o"  America,  that  such  citizen  should  be  discharged  from  his  ma- 
iefty's  service,  do  we  not  thereby  establish  a  principle  that  at  once  condem.. 
indpJZe^ld  to  the  practice  of  his.najestfs  naval  cffic^s  m  entenng  A- 
merican  ships,  in  search  of  and  for  the  purpose  of  i^preffing  Bntj^ 
Samen,  fmce  all  seam.n  found  on  board  such  ships  are  there  of  choice 
ui>d  by  volumary  contract  to  serve  in  the  American  employ  ." 

«But  if  neither  of  these  <jircu instances  can  be  considered  as  )^fl^^' 
ing  a  right  to  his  majesty's  government  to  refule  the  ^'^^^harge  of  Amer 
can  citizens,  does  it  not  refuk  .hat  the  ufu.l  provifo  -««"f^f/^  ^^^'^^^^ 
orders  for  the  difcharge  of  fuch  citizens,  and  which  >s  afiigned  as  a  rea- 
fon  againft  the  difcharge  of  John  Maxwell,  is  without  any  juft  foun  . 
t'ont^and  confequemly  operates  to  the  difadvantage  and  injury  of  tU^ 
American  citizens. 

Euract  of  a  letter  from  Rufus  Hing,  esrahe    tnthe  secretary  of  state,  datedj^ 

'•LONDON,  April  13,  i7y7.  ' 

«.Tt  was  before  my  arrival  that  lord  GrenviUe  had  expreffed  to  Mr 
Pinckney  a  diffiitisf action  with  the  practice  of  granting  pioteaions  t*. 
American  seamen  by  our  consuls.  rrP^vJllp  had 

writtrmVa^lTtt^rrin  which  this  branch  of  the  conlular  power  is  de- 
S  Tnd  notice  given  to  us  that  the  practice  muft  be  dilcontinued  A 
cipy  of  this  letter,  and  of  mine  tranfmitting  it  to  our  feveral  coniuls.  I 
ha'd'the  honor  to  fond  you  with  my  letter  of  the  ^^th  of  December- >. 
Pre  ous  to  the  commiinication  of  this  rcfolution  ot  the  Br.t.fh  gov 
ernment,  it  had  been  notified  to  Mr.  Pinckney.  that  ^^/Pjf-^^^^^^^ 
the  difcharge  of  American  foamen  imprefled   into  the  Bnti(h  iervice. 


11 

from  the  American  confuls,  as  had  beeii  cuftomary.  One  conlequence 
of  this  regulation  has  been,  that  the  fubjeft  in  all  its  details  has  come 
under  my  oblervation,  and  its  importance,  I  confefs,  is  much  greater 
than  Ihad  supposed  it.  Injiead  ofaftnv,  and  those  in  many  injlances  equtv- 
ocal  cases,  I  have,  fince  the  month  of  July  pnji  *  made  apphcatton  for  the 
discharge  from  the  Britifh  men  of  Huar  of  271  seamen, 'who,  fiatmgthert^ 
seh»s  to  be  Americans,  have  claimed  my  interference  :  Of  thts  number  86 
have  been  ordered  bv  the  admiralty  to  be  discharged  ;  37  more  have  been  ae- 
tained  as  British  subjeBs,  or  as  American  volunteers,  or  for  nvantofprooj 
that  they  are  Americans  ;  and  to  my  applicatic.is  for  the  discharge  \}'^'  ^'T 
maining  148, 1  have  received  no  answer  ;  the  ships  on  board  of  ivhich  these 
seamen  ivere  detained,  having  in  many  inflancesy  sailed  before  an  exanmatton 
sew  made  irt  comequence  of  my  applications  .\ 

"It  is  certain  that  Ibme  of  thole  who  have  applied  to  me  are  not  a- 
merican  citizens,  but  ihe  exceptions  are,  in  my  opinion,  few,  and  tne 
evidence,  exclufive  oi  certificates,  has  been  fuch  as,  mmoftcales,  to 
fatisfy  me,  that  the  applicants  were  real  Americans,  who  have  Deen 
forced  into  the  Britifti  fervice,  and  who,  with  Angular  conftancy,  nave 
generally  perfev^red  in  refufing  pay  and  bounty,  though  m  tome  m- 
ftances  they  have  been  in  fervice  more  than  two  years.  As  the  appli- 
cations for  my  aid  feemed  to  increafe,  after  the  fufpenfion  of  the  con- 
fular  power  to  grant  proteftions  (owing  to  the  expofed  fituatiop  ot  our 
feamen  in  confequence  of  the  denial  of  this  power,)  I  judged  it  advila- 
ble,  though  1  faw  little  profpeft  of  any  permanent  agreement,  to  attempt 
to  obtain  the  confent  of  this  government,  that,  under  certain  regula- 
tions, our  confuU  fnould  again  be  authorifed  to  grant  certificates  ot 
citizenftiip  to  our  feamen.     My  letter  to  lord  GrenviUe  and  his  aniwer 

you  have  enclofed,  i  •  u  t  i  „««  ^o 

"I  likewife  fend  you  the  copy  of  another  letter,  to  which  1  have  re- 
ceived no  anfwer,  that  I  wrote  to  lord  GrenviUe  in  order  to  expole  the 
inconfiftency  with  the  laws  and  principles  of  British  flegiance  of  a  rule 
by  which  av-knowledged  Americans  are  detained  in  the  Bntilh  lervice. 

•A  Detiod  of  about  eight  montln  only.  '  ,    .u^.  j,^, 

tByf^port  of  the  Lretary  of  state,  to  congre.s  dat^  Jan.  15.  1812.  j;^/^;^^^^ 
n.ent9  and  e^^dence  then  before  congress ;  it  appeared  ^hat  at  that  time  the.e  were  SIX 
THOUSAND  TWO  HUNDRED  AND  FIFTY  SEVEN  impressed  Americans  .n  tl« 
service  of  fc.ngland. 

Extract  nf  a  letter  from  Rufus  King,  Esq.  minister  plenipotentiary  of  the  Uni- 
ted  States,  to  the  Secretary  of  Siate,  dated 

"LONDON,    MARCH    15.    *799'         - 

*'I  then  mentioned  our  diflatisfaaion  with  the  continuation  of  the 
praaice  of  talking  out  of  our  Itips,  met  on  the  main  ocean,  fuch  of  ttieir 
crews  as  did  not  poiTefs  certificates  of  American  citizenfhip  ;  rf^^)'*^!:. 
a<!  T  had  often  done  in  former  conferences  upon  the  fame  fubjedt,  any 
right  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain  upon  niyhicb  the  praaice  coula  irejounueu^ 
and  suggefling  that  ourfhips  of  war,  by  permijfton  of  our  government,  might 
with  equal  right  pursue  the  same  praaice  ^, wards  their  merchantmen, 

"That  not  only  feamen  who  fpoke  the  Englilh  language,  and  wfta 
were  evidently  Engliih  or  American  fubjeas,  but  alfo  all  Damjb,  Hm^ 


difby  andjther  foreign  seamen,  who  could  not  receive  American  prcfea ions, 
•were  indiscriminately  taken  from  their  voluntary  service  in  our  neutral  enu 
ploy  and  forced  into  the  war  in  the  naval  service  of  Great  Britain. 

"  Ihat  on  this  fubjeft  we  had  again  and  again  offered  to  concur  in  a 
eonvention,  which  we  thought  pradicable  to  be  formed,  and  which 
mould  lettle  thefe  queftions  in  a  manner  that  would  be  fafe  for  En- 
gland, and  fatisfaftory  to  us. 

"That  to  decline  fuch  convention,  and  to  perfift  in  a  praflice  which 
we  were  perfuaded  could  not  be  vindicated,  efpecially  to  the  extent  to 
Which  It  was  earned,  feemed  lefs  equitable  and  moderate  than  we  tho't 
we  had  a  right  to  expeft. 

**Lord  Grenville  stated  no  precise  principle  upon  ivhich  he   supposed  this 
praBtce  could  be  jujiifed,  and  the  converfation  upon  this  point,  like  many 
others  Upon  the  fame  fubjea,   ended  without  a  profpea  of  fatisfaftion. 
J.t^ex<re.nch  and  ^aniardty  and  every  other  nation,  might  pursue  the  same 
conduct  as  rightfully  as  Great  Britain  does.     With  refpeft  to  foreign   fea- 
men  in  our  employ,  this  government  has,   if  I   recoiled,  yielded   the 
point,  though  their  officers  continue  the  praftice.     We  ar*  aiTured  that  • 
ail  Americans  fhall  be  difcharged  on  application  for  that  purpofe,  and  • 
that  orders  to  this  effeft  have  been  given  to  their  naval  commanders  ; 
therik^^  falisfaaion-indeed,  ^.  acquiesce  in  it, Js  to  give  up 

REMABK. 

l^rom  these  Letters,  it  appears,  that  the  extent  of  the  inju- 
ly  of  IMPRESSMENT  was  "much  greater"  to  America,  than  Mr. 
^ing,  or  the  American  People  generally,  "  had  supposed  it ;" 
Wiat  the  practice  of  England  militates  with  her  own  princi- 
pies,  in  demanding  men  naturalized  by  other  nations,  while 
She  refuses  to  give  up  those  naturalized  by  herself— That  al- 
though the  cabinet  of  Great  Britain  can  assign  no  ^^  princi- 
pie    to  justify  her  claim  of  impressments  from  on  board  our 
ships,  yet  they  are  determined  to  continue  the  practice  in  its 
Whole  extent  and  with  all  its  aggravations,  and  our  minister 
aespairs  of  obtaining  any  satisfaction ;  that  all  further  nego- 
ciation  upon  the  subject  would  be  futile;  and  that  America 
must  forever  submit  to  this  novel  and  unprincipled  claim, 
this  intolerable  injury,  insult  and  degradation,  or  make  the 
last  and  glorious  appeal  in  defence  of  its  honor  and  indepen- 
dence, and  of  the  equality  of  nations. 

This  claim  of  Great  Britain  was  first  in-vented  by  her,  to  be 
applied  to  this  country  after  its  emancipation  and  acknowl^ 
edged  independence ;  and  undoubtedly  arose  from  a  dpsirp, 
^e^f^TrlT'  °^  'V.'".^  something  from  the  pieces  of  the  wreck 
^Ive  u.Z7'7^"'V^'"  ''^™^^  ^'^^^^^^  to  its  base.  She  ■ 
h^rLnZ  i'l  '^'^^""'^  "P""  '^'  ^^^'^'  ^'hile.  contrary  to 
^^x  ex^rm  acknowledgment,  she  continued  to  compel  and  se- 


I" 


13 

cure  our  services  upon  the  ocean.     Washington  saw  the  ten 

ag  '•  Lit     inir  '"  -'■°-'^«g'»datio„,  and  re^o^Zfi 
aga mst  it ;  m  his  opinion  we  were  then  too  feeble  to  wae-e 
another  war.     Adams  saw  it,  and  remomt rated     Z^Z 
kewisa  saw  It,  and  remonstrated.     In  the  mean  time  ™a 
on  revived  from  the  distresses  and  privations  of  The  Revo 
lutionary  war ;  it  encreased  in  numbers  and  oppulence  and" 
became  powerful ;  circumstances  in  Europe  changed,  and 
the  policy  of  our  government  changed  with  them    tronf 
prospects  of  success  reviv>  d  the  hopes  of  America  •  and  ^ 
remained  for  President  MADISON  to  take  that"  ten  In  onr 
national  policy,   which  .«  his  predecessors  sZ^2' Zal 
betaken,  and  ardently  longed  for  the  time,  when  by  reason 
of  the  increasing  strength  of  our  nation  and  a  change  of  cir 
cumstances,  it  could  be  taken  with  a  reasonable  exp^ectat  on 
of  an  honorable  peace.     What  the  fathers  of  our  cOnnfrv 
Washington,  Adams,  Jefferson,  and  their  copatriots  to™ 
prophesied  as  essential  to  the  complete  emancipaHorof  Ame 
nca,  our  present  Congress  have  had  the  policy  and  com 
o  declare,  a  war  nvith  Great  Britain.     And,  by  thi.  measure 
<hey  have  only  met  the  war  on  one  side,  which  EngS  his 
been  so  long  unjustly  wagingagainst  this  country:  ^ 

Practical  Operation  of  Impressments, 

IS    Julv  to  30.1,  Stpiember,   i8,o  inclusively  '     *  '  ''"•"•"^  ""■  *">«' 


Proteftions  from  Confuls 
and^iceConfuls  H 

Notarial  affidavits  made  in 
Uie  United  States 


S  -SJ 
28  ^^  "^  .5    .  Do.  do.  England 

1  s  ^  § 


.;i    •  A^o.  ao.  iLngiand 
•g   1  CoIIeaor.s  Proteftions 

Admiralty  Prote<^ions 

Indentures 

Documents  from  the  De- 


Bischarged  and  ordered  to  be  dif. 
charged 
"Having  no  documents 
Being  Natives  of  the  United 

Kingdo;  . 
Do.  Weft  Indies 
Do.  Africa 
Do  Impofters  5i  s  <:  - 

eivenr  h^        defcnpuon      ^  Cannot  afcertain  the  names  of  the 
Hi^^^^X::^:^     1^^      ;^;P- board  of  which  .en  are 

^'T±%^^'  "^^"^'^  '"  ^he  U.      S  Not  on  board  the  ftips  as  ftated 
^"^'"-^°'"  3(^Deferted  *^ 

S  Drowned 

2  S  Killed 

1  (,  Invalided  ^ 

1  ;^  On  board  fhips  on  foreign  ftations  59 

2  ^,  Applications  unanfwered  1 


Having  been  taken  in  priva- 
te   3  of  the  enemy 
No  reafon  affigned 
Being  a  deferier 
Being  a  native  of  Pruffia 
LNot  being  Amerieanai 


9 
8 
2 
1 
1 

10 


13 

Q 

7 

2 
1 
S 


14 

Clerk^sOjtce,  Houfe  ef  Representatives  of  the  United  States. 
1  certify,  that  the  foregoing  is  a  true  copy  of  the  ahftraft  G.  contained  in 
the  mefliige  from  the  Prefident  of  the  United   States  tranfmilting  a  report 
ftom  the  Secretary  of  State,  ou  the  fubjefts  of  imprefTmenta,  of  the  loth  Jan. 
1^12,  the  original  whereof  is  now  on  file  in  my  office. 
In  nv'itnefi  •whereof^  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  nfiixed  the  feal  of  my 
office,  the  12th  November,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  ihoufand 
(seal)     eight  hi-nJred  and  twelve,  and  of  the  Independence  of  the  United 
States  the  thirty-feventh. 

-    P.  MAGRUDER,  c.  h.  r.  u.  s. 

It  will  be  observed  that  this  number  of  325  Mariners  were 
all  impressed  from  on  board  of  American  vessels,  during  the 
short  period  of  THREfi  months.  And  if  the  operation  of  the 
British  practice  of  Impressment  be  so  destructi-ve  upon  our 
fellow-citizens,  in  the  short  space  of  three  months,  what  would 
it  be  in  the  course  of  years,during  the  whole  continuance  of  a 
"vyar,  and  upon  our  posterity  forever  ?  Let  the  honest  and 
indignant  feelings  of  our  happy  Yeomanry,  who  love  justice 
between  nations  as  well  as  individuals,  determine. 


Extract  of  the  Prnclamatinn  of  the  President  restoring  commercial  imercoursc 
with  Great  Britain,  and  leaving  our  statute  of  Nonintercourse  in  for<e  as  to 
France,  agreeably  tw  the  arrangement  made  with  Mr.  Erskine,  the  minister 
Plenipotentiary  ot  Great  Britain. 

By  the  President  of  the  United  States  of  America. 
A  PROCLAMATION. — Whereas  the  honourable  David  Montague  Erf- 
kine,  his  Britannic  majefty's  envoy  extraordinary  and  miniCJter  plenipo- 
tentiary, has,  by  the  order  and  in  the  name  of  his  fovereign,  declared  to 
this  government,  that  the  Britifh  orders  in  council  of  January  and 
November  1807,  will  have  been  withdrawn  as  refpeds  the  United 
States,  on  the  tenHi  day  of  June  next.  Now,  therefore,  I  James  Mad- 
ison, preHdent  of  the  Unhed  States,  do  hereby  proclaim,  that  the  orders 
in  council  aforefaid  will  have  been  withdrawn  on  the  faid  tenth  day 
of  June  next ;  after  whith  day  the  trade  of  the  United  States  with 
Great  Britain,  as  fufpended  by  the  aft  of  Congrefs  above  mentioned, 
and  an  aft  laving  an  embargo  on  all  fliips  and  veffels  in  the  ports  and 
harbours  of  the  United  States,  and  the  feveral  aas  fupplementary  there- 
to, may  be  renewed. 

Given  under  my  hand  and  feal  of  the  United  States,  at  Wafhingf 
the  nineteenth  day  of  April,  in  tiie  year  of  our  Lord,   < 
L.  s.      thoufand  eight  hundred  and  nine,  and  of  the  Independence  of 
the  Unhed  States,  the  thirty-third. 

JAMES  MADISON. 

By  the  Frcfidmt — Rt.  Smitk,  Secretary  of  State. 

Tlie  arrangement  made  with  Mr.  Erlkine,  and  this  proclamation  of 
the  Prefident,  ilTued  conformably  to  that  arrangement,  fhow  clearly 
the  difpofition  of  the  American  Cabinet  to  conclude  a  treaty  with  Great 


J5 

Britain,  whenever  It  can  be  done  tonfiftently  vith  the  interefts,  safety^ 
and  honor  of  America  i  &  even  to  go  to  war  'with  France ^  if  fuch  a  meas- 
ure lliould  be  neceflary,  to  obtain  indemnity  for  French  fpoliations  upon 
our  commerce,  and  to  fecureour  maritime  rights.  Atvd  which  arrange- 
ment, had  it  been  ratified  and  carried  into  effe<5l  in  good  faith  and  hon- 
eily  by  Great  Britain,  would  without  doubt,  have  eventuated  in  a  final 
and  (atisfaitory  fettlenient,  with  England,  of  all  our  differences,  and  in 
a  vigorous  war  with  the  French  Empire.  This  delire,  in  tlie  American 
executive,  of  a  fettlement  and  peace  whh  England,  fo  fatisfa£torily  ex- 
emplified by  the  readiness  with  which  this  arrangement  was  entered  in- 
to on  our  part,  is  incontrovertible  proof,  and  mufl  latisfy  every  candid 
mind,  of  the  impartiality  of  the  American  Cabinet  toward  the  bellige- 
rents ;  and  of  the  groundlefs  nature  and  abfurdity  of  the  accufations  of 
French  alliance^  French  partiality ^  secret  understanding  ivith  Napoleonf  pre" 
j Lidice  againji  England^  and  the  whole  (Iring  of  invectives  which  have 
been  To  illiberally  beftowed  upon  our  Government  by  unprincipled  hire- 
lings throughout  the  Union.  And  why  was  not  this  arrangement  carried 
into  effedl  in  good  faith  ?  Ask  the  Britijfj  Cabinet  ;  for  George  the 
3d  alone  can  anlwer  the  queftion.  He  put  art  end  to  the  arrangement, 
and  he  alone  is  the  caufe,  why  America  is  not  now  at  peace  with  Eng- 
land and  at  war  with  the  French  Emperor.  The  American  Cabinet 
has  never  been  accufed  of  infidelity  or  a  defire  of  breaking  over  this  ar- 
rangement, fo  Iblemniy  and  amicably  concluded.  , 


1 


Extract  from  Mr,  Kent's  speech  in  the  last  Congress,  on  the  Army  Bill. 

What  Jiave  been  the  propofitions  heretofore  made  by  our  govern- 
ment to  Great  Britain  upon  this  fubject  ?  I  find,  by  a  recyrrejice  to 
the  correfpondence  of  McfTrs.  Munroe  and  Pinckney  with  that  govern- 
ment in  1806,  that  we  made  the  following  propofitions.  Here  Mr.  K. 
-I'ead  the  following  popofals  from  the  public  documents  of  1807-8.  We 
offered — 

1ft.  To  afford  no  refuge  or  proteftion  to  Britifh  Teamen. 

2d.  To  deliver  them  up  if  they  took  refuge  among  us. 

3d.  To  make  laws  for  reftoring  them. 

4th,  To  aid  in  fearching  for,  feizing  and  refloring  them. 

5th.  To  keep  them  in  our  prifons  when  requefled. 

6th.  To  prohibit  our  citizens  from  carrying  them  off. 

7th.  To  prohibit  their  employment. 

8th.  To  make  penal  laws  forpun  f -ing  their  employers. 

9th.  To  make  it  our  duty  to  reflore  them. 

10th.  To  extend  the  foregoing  provifions  not  only  to  deferters,  buC 
to  all  fea-faring  people. 

Thefe  propolitions  went  completely  to  fecure  to  Great  Britain  the 
fervices  of  all  her  lea-faring  fubjeAs,  except  fuch  as  were  naturalized 
under  our  laws,  which  amounted  to  but  few  indeed  j  thirteen  hundred( 
Britiih  i'eamen  only  having  been  naturalized  fince  the  commencement, 
of  our  government,  and  in  all  probability  an  equal  number  of  our  fea-* 

Dritfain  during  the  fame  period. — \ 


I! 

11 


I 


IG 


,  Yet  to  my  aftoniihment  have  I  heard  it  iVated  during  this  debate,  that 
our  government  had  made  no  ferious  propofitions  to  lecuie  to  Great 
Britain  the  fervices  of  her  feamen. 

But  equitable  as  theie  propoiitions  were,  they  were  reje<Sted.  Not- 
withftanding,  fir,  our  government,  anxious  in  their  purluit  after  peace, 
have  gone  ftill  further  i  they  have,  through  our  late  Charge  des  Affaires 
in  London  (Mr.  Ruflell)  propofed  to  Great  Britain  to  excude  from  our 
naval  fervice  (as  well  public  as  private)  all  her  feamen,  including  thole 
which  may  hereafter  be  ?iaturalized,  ind  notwithftandingthe  liberality 
and  juftice  of  this  propofal,  it,  Hke  all  others,  has  been  made  without 
producing  the  defired  efFeft  :  And  what  more,  fir,  could  have  been  ask- 
ed of  us,  required,  or  granted,  than  is  contained  in  thefe  offers  ?  No- 
thing more  j  unlefs,  indeed,  they  had  asked  for  our  independence,  and, 
yielding  to  the  requifition,  we  had  granted  it.  When  an  American  vef- 
lel  is  at  fea,  it  is.  amenable  to  no  laws  but  thofe  of  its  own  country  and 
the  laws  of  nations  -,  and  where  in  either  of  thole  v/ill  the  advocates  for 
imprefTment  find  their  juftification  ?  Sir,  had  not  the  practice  of  im- 
preflment  been  treated  as  a  cafual,  a  trivi.^l  circu'mftance,  during  this  de- 
bate, I  fhould  not  have  prefumecl  to  trouble  the  Houfe  with  my  dcful- 
tory  remarks,  and  my  principle  objedl  in  addrefling  the  Houfe  was  to 
ask  their  attention  to  a  document  which  appears  to  have  been  overlook- 
ed, and  which,  if  neceflary,  will  place  the  abomination  of  that  pradlice 
in  colours  too  ftrong  to  be  mistaken. 

Here  Mr.  K.  read  the  following  extract  of  a  letter  from  the  Secreta- 
ry of  State  to  Mr.  Monroe,  dated  January  4,  1804 — 

"The  whole  number  of  applications  made  by  imprefled  feamen  to  our 
Cooful  in  London  between  the  month  of  June  '97  and  September  1801,  were 
two  tlioufand  and  fifty  nine.  Of  this  number  an  hundred  and  two  leamen 
only  were  detained  as  Britiih  fubjefts  ;  which  is  lefs  than  one-twentieth  of  the 
whole  number  imprefled.  Eleven  hundred  and  forty-two  were  difcharged, 
or  ordered  to  be  fo,  and  eight  liundred  and  five  were  detained  for  further 
proof  with  the  ftrongeft  prefumption  that  the  greater  part,  if  not  the  whole 
were  Americans,  or  othsr  aliens  whofe  proof  of  citizenlhip  had  been  lofl  or 
dettroyed." 

It  is  then  evident  from  this  document,  that  for  every  Britifh  feanian 
obtained  by  this  violent  proceeding,  a  number  of  Americans  or  other 
aliens  with  whom  Great  Britain  has  no  right  to  meddle,  not  lefs  than 
twenty  for  one,  have  been  the  vidims  to  it.  Sir,  have  we  become  fo 
loft  to  the  real  independence  and  fovereignty  of  the  country,  that  we 
are  prepared  to  yield  to  this  degrading,  debafing  and  humiliating  badge 
of  valTalage.  « 

The  Romans  of  old  had  a  practice  of  making  the  governors  of  thofe 
countries  they  conquered  pafs  annually  beneath  their  yoke  as  a  mark 
nf  r.iKrt-.;-fTi^«^    J-.,.f  .i.o     Anr\r•^'^'\  *-<^  K!i'T'!l»''t'''^p  f'^T  crrpc\tpr^  are    made    to 

pafs  daily,  nay  hourly,  beneath  one  much  more  galling. 

REJECTED  TREATY. 
By  fome  it  is  faid  thsit    all  our  evils,  if  we  have  evils  to  corapl  'n  of; 
flow  from  the  fingle  circynirtance  of  the  rejeftion  of  the  Treaty  smug-» 
led  into  this  country  in   the  year  1806.   by  the  Britiih  Miniilry.     A 


it 

mere  examination  of*  that  Treaty  will  fatisfy  eVery  Americiin  of  the  ru- 
inous confequences  that  would  have  refulted  to  this  Country  fromitf 
ratification  ;  and  that  the  Preiident  afted  as  duty  to  his  country  requi- 
required,  in  rejecting  it.  Let  us  Only  look  at  the.circUmftances  under 
which  that  treaty  was  formed,  the  fentintiehts  of  our  Ministers  in  En- 
gland, then  exprefTed  to  the  BHtifh  Comiiiiflloners,  concerning  it } 
and  above  all  the  highly  objectionable,  and  indeed  inadmillible,.  note 
of  the  Britifh  cabinet  which  accompanied  it  to  America  and  which  was 
to  be  deemed  a  part  of  the  treaty  if  ratified  by  the  two  governmetlts. 

Extracts  of  a  letter  from  the  Secretary  of  State  to  MeflVs.  MoKkOe  and  Pink. 
N£Y,  our  Miniftcrs  at  Lbndoiii  dated  May  ao,  1807. 

The  prefiCtent  continues  to  regard  this  fubje^t  in  the  light  in  whieh  it  hff 
been  prefTed  on  the  juilice  and  friendfhip  of  Gn^ftt  Britain.  He  caanot  rcw 
concile  it  with  his  duty  to  our  fea-faring  cicizciis,  or  writh  the  fenfibility  or 
fovcreiguty  of  the  nation,  to  recognize  even  condrudtively*  a  principlf  that 
would  expofe  on  the  high  leas,  their  libeity,  their  lives,  every  thing  in* 
word,  that  is  dearcil  to  the  human  heart,  to  the  capricious  or  intefefted  fen* 
tences  which  may  be  pronounced  againfl>  their  allegiance,  by  ofilcera  o£  a 
foreign  government,  whom  neither  the  law  of  nations,  nor  eveij  the  laws  of 
that  government,  will  allow  to  decide  on  the  ownerftiip  or  chancer  of  the 
ainuteft  article  of  property  found  in  a  like  fituatioq.  , 

IF ithout  a  provision  agaimt  mpressmentst  fubftantially  fuch  as  is  contemplated 
in  your  original  inftrudtions,  no  treaty  is  to  be  cohcldded. 

From  this  communication^  and  from  the  letter  of  Mein*s.  Monroe  and 
Pinkne}^,  publifhed  by  order  of  Congrefs,  with  the  documents  (contain- 
ing the  treaty  which  was  rejedted  and  the  correfpondence  relating  to  it,) 
it  would  appear,  that  pofitive  inftrudtions  had  beeu  given  to  our  minifif 
ters,  not  to  conclude  a  treaty,  unlefs  a  provifion  ihould  be  vcyaAe  againft.; 
impreffments.  And  yet  in  their  letter  dated  3d  Jan  1^07,  upon  the- 
fubjedt  of  the  treaty  fent  out  to  America,  they  hy--^**Jf^e  ar^  sorry  Uadd 
that  this  treaty  contains  no  provisions  against  the  impressment  of  our  seamen  J^- 

The  Britidi  commifiioners  refufed  to  infert  a  provifion  againft  im-"^ 
preflliients  in  the  treaty;  but   in  a  note  ligned  by  Lords  Holland  and- 
Auckland,  dire<fted  to  our  minifters  and  dated  Nov.  8,  1806,  they  give 
the  American  minifters  the  mo^  positive  assurances  that  a  provifion  againft 
impreflinents  fhall  be  made,  such  as  will  come  within  the  puriiew  cftheif 
original  instruEiions.  Public  Documents  p.  11 7^     • 

Upon  the  fu'ije£l  of  thefe  aflTurances  of  the  Britifti  commifipiofiers 
Meffrs.  Monroe  and  Pinkney  fay,    "The  time  at  which  this  note  wast 
prefented  to  us,  and  the  circumftances  under  which  it  was  prefented»- 
being  when  the  negociation  was  abfolutely  at  a  ftand  on  this  very  quel-' 
tion   and  we  had  informed  the  Britifh  commifiioners,  that  we  could  do- 
nothing  if  it  was  not  provided  for^  give  to  this  ACT  a  peculiar  degree  sf  sO'- 
Itmnity  and  obligation.     It  was  fent  to  us  as  a  public  pajyer,  and  intended 
that  we  fiiould  fo  confider  it,  and  with  the  knowledge  and  approbatioa 
of  the  cabinet.     It  ought,  therefore  to  be  held  as  obligatory  on  the  gov-  ■ 
ernment,  in  its  juft  import,  2s  if  the  fubftance  had  been  ftipulated  in  a 
treaty."     And  in  that  view  of  it,  the  American  Minifi:ers' figited  the  trea- 
ty.    And  in  a  letter  dated  December  27,  1806,  they  exprelfed  a  confi- 


|1 


tn 

clence,  that  the  arrangement  would  meet  the  approbation  of  their  got- 
ernment.  But,  to  the  aftoniftiment  of  every  real  American,  the  Amer^ 
lean  minifters  have  to  announce  to  their  government,  and  to  the  world, 
the  bad  faith  of  the  hritijh  cabinet  in  itEFUSING  THE  ABOVE  REASONA- 
BLE ARRANGEMENT.  In  their  letter  dated  April  22,  1807,  they  fay, 
**We  had  many  conferences  with  the  Britifh  commiffioners,  previous  to 
the  late  change,  upon  the  fubjedt  of  impreflments,  in  which  they  inva- 
riably declared  to  us,  that  the  pradlice  of  their  government  would  be 
ftriftly  conformable  to  the  fpirit  of  the  article,  which  they  had  fettled 
with  us  }  and  ivhich  was  afterwards  JiEJECTED  hY  THE  CABINET. 
They  dated  that  the  prejudice  of  the  navy,and  of  the  country  generally, 
was  fo  ftrong  in  favour  of  their  pretensions  that  the  miniflry  could  not 
encoynter  it  in  a  diredt  form,  and  that,  in  truth,  the  fupport  of  Parlia- 
ment could  not  have  been  relied  on,  in  fuch  a  caseT 

Who,  after  this  candid  developement  of  fadts,  can  fay,  that  Great 
Britain  has  always  been  ready  honorably  to  fettle  the  important  difpute 
which  relates  to  the  impreffment  of  American  Seamen  ?  Who  can  now 
wonder,  that  the  treaty  was  rejefted,  when  the  faith  of  the  Britifh  cabi- 
net was  fo  fhamefuUy  violated  ?  Where  is  the  man,in  whofe  bofom  beats 
an  American  heart,  who  cari  believe  that  the  American  government 
would  ratify  the  treaty,  when  Mr.  Monroe  and  Mr.  Pinkney  are  both 
led  to  doubt.  In  their  letter,  lait  quoted,  they  fay,  "We  ftated,  how- 
ever, (to  Mr.  Canning  in  converfation)  that  we  had  great  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  the  treaty  would  not  be  ratified  in  its  prefent  form,  for  caufes 
which  were  well  known  to  his  majefty's  late  government.  We  then 
communicated  to  him  fully  all  the  circumftances  on  which  that  remark 
was  founded}  particularly  the  naturaof  our  inftrudlions,  relative  to  im- 
preiTments;  the  knowledge  which  the  Britifh  commiffioners  had  of 
them  ;  the  entire  fufpenfion  of  the  negociation  at  a  certain  period,  on 
the  failure  with* the  Cabinet,  of  a  projed^  of  an  article  for  the  regulation 
of  that  point.  And  finally,  the  condition  on  which  we  did  proceed  in 
the  bufinefs,  that  is,  that  our  government  would  not  be  bound  to  ratify  the 
treaty^  if  it  fhould  not  be  fatisfied  with  the  fubftitute  for  fuch  an  article 
oiFered  in  that  note.*' 

The  Britifh  Commiffioners  having  been  thus  expressly  notified,  that 
our  minifters  had  not  afted  conformably  to  their  inftrudtions,  in  fig-n- 
inga  treaty,  without  a  ftipulation  againft  the  impreffinent  of  our  fea- 
men,  and  alfo  an  exprefs  refervation  having  been  made  at  the  time  of 
fuch  iignature,  "  that  the  American  government  would  not  be  bound 
to  ratify  the  treaty  if  it  fhould  not  be  fatisfied  with  the  fubftitute"  offered 
in  the  note*,  the  Britifh  Cabinet  have  therefore, no  reafon  to  complain, 
on  their  part,  of  the  rejedlion  of  the  treaty  by  our  government.  And 
this  very  note  propofed  by  the  Britifh  Commiffioners,  as  a  fubftitute  for 
an  article  in  the  treaty,  upon  the  fubjedl  of  impreffinents,  having  been 
diftivowed  and  rejedied  by  the  minijlry  of  Great  Britain,  left  this  moft 
important  fubje£t  of  impreiTment  wholly  without  ftipulation.  And  if 
the  treaty  had  been  ratified  by  our  government,  under  fuch  circumftan- 
cas,  our  mariners  would  have  been  altogether  abandoned  to  the  mercy 
of  England,  arid  her  pretended  right  to  imprefs  men,  from  on  board  our 


Id 


fhips  at  lla,  thereby,  acknoivledgeJ.  And  fuch  acknowledgment  wa$ 
undoubtedly  the  great  object  of  the  Britilh  Cabinet,  during  the  whole 
tr  in  of  \.\\\'Aj}ratige  and  equivocal  negociation.  And  it  is  due  to  the  great 
forefight,  dircernment,andpatriotifmof  the  American  Cabinet,  that  this 
treaty  has  been  rejected,  and  that  our  fellow  citizens  have  POt  be^a 
abandoned.  ^  ' 

Another  caufe,  however,  and  if  poflible  a  more  important  one,  for  the 
reje(Stionof  this  treaty,  yet  remains  to  be  confidered.  An  objection  to 
the  treaty  altogether  insurmountable.  Juft  before  the  treaty  was  fent  out 
to  America  for  ratificj^tion,  Lords  Holland  and  Auckland  communicated 
to  our  minifters  a  written  note,  <?f  which  the  following  is  an  extra«ft. 

London,  December  31,  \%o6. 

The  underfigned  Henry  Richaid  Vaflall  Lord  Holland,  and  William 
Lord  Auckland,  plenipotentiaries  of  his  Britannic  majefty,  have  the  honor  to 
inform  James  Monroe  and  Willianf.  Pinkney,  commiffioners  extraordinary  and 
plenipotentiaries  of  the  United  States  of  AmeJca,  that  they  are  now  ready 
to  proceed  to  the  flgnatnre  of  the  treaty  of  amity,  commerce  and  navigation^ 
on  the  articles  of  which  they  have  mutually  agreed. 

But  at  the  fame  time,  they  have  it  in  command  from  his  majefty,  to  caU 
the  attention  of,  the  commiffioners  of  the  United  States,  to  fome  extraordi- 
nary proceedings  which  have  lately  taken  place  on  the  continent  of  Europe, 
and  to  communicate  to  them  officially  the  sentiments  of  his  majefty's  govern- 
encnt  thereupon. 

The  proceedings  alluded  to  are  certain  declarations  and  orders  of  the 
French  government  iffued  at  Berlin  on  the  21  ft  of  November  last. 

If  however  the  enemy  (hould  carry  thefe  threats  into  execution,  and  if 
neutral  nations,  contrary  to  all  expectation,  ftiould  acquiefce  in  fuch  ufur» 
pations,  his  majefty  might  probably  be  compelled,  however  reluaantjy,  to 
retaliate  in  his  juft  defence,  flwi /o  od^'ptt  in  regard  to  the  commerce  of  neutral 
nations  nvith  his  eneviies^  tke  same  mtamres  which  those  nations  shall  have  permitted  to 
be  enforced  against  their  commerce  nvith  his  Subjects.  The  commiffioners  of  the 
United  States  will  therefore  feel,  that  at  a  moment  when  his  majefty  and  aUl 
neutral  nations  are  threatened  with  fuch  an  exienfjon  of  the  belligerent  pre*. 
tenfions  of  his  enemies,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  ftipulations  of  the  prefen^: 
treaty,  without  an  explanation  from  the  United  States,  of  their  intentions,  or 
a  reservation  on  t  e  part  of  his  majeity  in  the  case  abavementionedi  if  it  should  ever 
occur. 

The  underfigned  confidering  that  the  diftance  of  the  American  govern- 
ment renders  an  immediate  explanation  on  this  fubject  impofllble,  and  ani- 
mated by  a  defire  of  forwarding  the  beneficial  work  in  which  they  are  engag- 
ed, are  authorized  by  his  majefty  to  conclude  the  treaty  without  delay. 
Thq^r  proceed  to  the  fignature  under  the  full  perfuafion  that  before  the  treaty 
ftiall  be  returned  from  America  with  the  ratification  of  the  United  States,  the 
enemy  will  either  have  formally  abandoned  or  tacitly  relinquifhed  hisunjuft 
pretentions,  ar  that  the  government  of  the  United  States,  by  its  conduft  or 
ajlurances,  will  have  given  fecurity  to  his  majefty  that  It  will  not  fubmit  to 

jucn   mnovaciuua  lu    luc  ciiaumncu  lyvicm    vi  isi«i!i.«!.c  .«■"  .  ~t.».  «»?»-  *" 

fignedhaveprefented  this  note  from  an  anxious  wifti  that  it  fliould  be  clear- 
ly ui>derftood  on  both  fide^,  that  tolthout  sv'-  an  .abandonment  on  the  part  of 
the  enemy  t   or  su,:h   assurances,    or   such   condui..     .i  the  part  rf  the  United  States ^ 

his  majesty  will  not  consider  himself  bound  by  the  present  sig^ 


nature  of  his  commissioners  to  ratify  the  treaty^   or  precluded 
from  adopting  such  measures  as  may  seem  necessary  for  coifn- 

teracting  the  designs  cf  his  enemy. 

.    ..    :  1     A,..       ...  VASSAL  HOLLAND, 

(SignedJ  AUCKLAND. 

To  Jatnes  Monroe,  bSc.  ftfc.  i^c. 
.  William  Pinkney,  Wr.  Vc.  Gfr. 

In  what  view  our  minifters  at  London  cpniidered  this  note,  will  ap^ 
pear  by  their  liptfer  to  our  government. 

Extras  of  a  letter  fyom  Meffrs.  Monroe  and  Phtkney,  dated  ^an.  3,  J  807, 
VVe-repHcd  in  very  explicit  ierm«  to  the  BFitishcomrtiissioners  mat  nv^  consid- 
ered thair  proposition  ifittgether  inadmissible  on  our  part,  and  not  likely  to  ac- 
complrslf,  if  tue  €Ould  agree  to  if,  the  object  nuhich  they  contemplated  by  it  :  that 
such  a  proposition  toourgoverninent,  under  the  circumstances  atiendmg  it,  would 
arnou\ir»  in  ^gbstance./p  <i«  offer  to  it  of  the  alter naf I've  between  the  treaty,  and 
a  nuar  naitb  France,  since  if  our  go'vernment  refused  to  gi-ve  the  satisfaction 
tubich  they  defired,  the  treaty  nuould  be  lost  :  and  if  such  satisfaction  was  given 
and  th«  treaty  concluded,  and  France  should  persist  to  execuip  her  Hecrep,  .ap- 
Cording  to  the  construction  given  of  it  here,  war  seemed  tq  be  inevitable. 

In  transmitting  to  you  thii  paper,  it  is  our  dtuy  to  observe  that  'uoe  do  not  con- 
sider ourselves  mpqrty  to.  it,  or  as  paving  given  it  in  any  the  slightest  degree 
our  sanftion..  .  .^.,    . 

'  Ha4  ^^e  proposition  contained  in  this  forma]  note  of  the 
Britisli  Commissioners  been  sanctioned  by  our  government, 
as  it  would  have  been  by  a  ratification  of  the  treaty,  the  Ar 
merio^n  Cabinet  would  thereby  have  expressly  recognized  the 
pretended  right,  claimed  by  Great  Britain,  of  retaliating 
THRouOH  NEUTRALS  the  wrougs  of  the  belligerents.  Which  is 
the  very  preposterous  doctrine  lately  advanced  by  England, 
that  a  neutral  who  is  compelled  to  suffer  a  wrong  from  one 
of  the  belligerents,  thereby  gives  a  right  to  the  other  belligerent 
to  inflict  upon  the  same  neutral  a  similar  or  an  equal  wrong.  A 
monstrous  doctrine,  which  no  neutral  will  ever  recognisse  or  sub- 
mit to,  who  has  any  sens^  of  Justice  ;  any  regard  to  her  own 
iionor;  or  any  power  to  defend  her  rights.  The  recognition  of 
such  a  principle, wopld  be,  to  place  neutrals,  on  all  occasions,at 
the  mercy  of  other  ndktions,  without  the  right  of  complaining  ; 
and  to  make  them,  as  it  were,  Foot-ballsyto  be  beaten  and  buf- 
feted on  both  side^,  and  kicked  tp  and  fro,  for  the  sport  of  the 

belligerents.  ^ 

Since  the  Declaration  of  War,  to  evince  their  fincere  defire  of  an  hon- 
orable peace  with  England,  and  in  order  if  poflxble  to  obtain  fp  impor- 
tant an  objeift,  our  government  have  at  feveral  different  times,  made 
propofitionis  for  an  armiftice,  on  reasottahle  and  fair  term,  through  the 
ptedium  ofiheir  iagentfi     Qi>e  of  which  will  appear  by  the  loiiowing, 

EsctraB  of  a  letter  frofti  JJf  r.  Rttfell  to  Lord  Cafilereagh,  dated 

London,  24fth  Auguft,  1812. 
JW>  Lerd—h  is  only  ncceffary,  I  truft,  to  call  the  attention   of  your  Lordship 
fa  a  review  of  the  coniludl  of  the  government  of  the  United  States,   to  prove  jn< 


controvcrJibly  its  uncrafinj;  anxiety  to  maintain  the  relations  of  peace  and  frhfn^- 
<hip  wiih  Great  Bniain.  In  patience  in  futfering  the  many,  wrongs  which  it  hts 
received,  and  its  perfevcrance  in  endeavoring  by  amicable  means  to  obtaiti  /e„ 
dref»  are  known  to  tlie  world,  Pefpairing,  ar  length,  of  recetvinn  this  redrefs 
from  thejiinicc  of  the  Sritifli  Rovernment,  to  which  it  iiad  fo  often  applied  in  vain, 
and  fcelini;  that  a  further  foibearance  would  be  a  virtual  (iirrender  of  intereffsand 
rights  eflential  to  the  profpcrity  and  independence  of  the  nation  confided  ro  its 
proteclion,  it  has  been  compelled  to  difchargc  its  high  duty  by  an  appeal  to  arms. 
While,  however,  it  regards  this  courfe  as  the  only  one  which  rentained  for  it  to 
purfue,  with  a  hope  of  preferving  any  portion  of  that  kind  of  character  whicii 
ponflitutes  the  vital  Hrength  of  every  nation  ;  yet,  it  is  ffill  willing  to  give  anoth. 
er  proof  of  the  fpirit  which  has  uniformly  di/finguifhed  its  proceedings,  (>y  feek- 

ing  to  arreff,  on  terms  confiftent  with  juflice  and  honor,   the  calamities  of  war. 

It  has,  therefore,  authorifed  me  to  ftipulate  with  his  Britannic  Majeffy's  govern- 
ment an  armiftice,  to  commence  at  or  before  tlie  expiration  of  fixty  days  after  the 
/ignatnre  of  the  inffrument  providing  for  it,  on  condition  that  the  orders  in  coun- 
ril  be  repealed,  ?nd  no  illegal  blockades  be  fubftituted  to  them,  and  that  orders 
be  immediately  given  to  difcpntinue  the  impreirment  of  perfona  from  American 
vefTels,  and  t#»  reHore  the  citiren  of  the  United  States  already  impreffed  ;  it  being 
rnoreovcr  well  underflood,  that  the  Britifh  government  will  alTent  to  enter  into 
definitive  arrangements,  as  foon  as  may  be,  on  thofe  and  every  other  difTcrence, 
by  a  treaty  to  be  concluded  either  at  London  or  Wafhington,  as,  on  an  impartial 
confideration  of  exifling  circumflancei  fhall  be  deemed  moft  expedient. 

As  an  inducement  to  Great  Britain  to  difcontinue  the  practice  of  imprefTment 
from  American  yeffels,  I  am  authorifed  to  give  afTurance  that  a  law  fhall  ht 
pafled  (to  be  reciprocal)  to  prohibit  the  employment  of  Britifh  feamen  in  the 
public  or  commercial  fervice  of  the  United  States. 

It  is  finderely  believed,  that  fuch  an  arrangement  would  prove  more  efiicacioui 
in  feiruring  to  Great  Britain  her  feamen,  than  the  practice  of  tmpreirment,  fo  de. 
rogatory  to  ihe  fovereign  attributes  of  the  United  States,  and  fo  incompatible 
with  the  perfonal  rights  of  their  citizens.  [  This  propofition  was  rejeded  by  tljc 
^ritifh  Cab'net.;) 


REPORT 
Cf  the  Committee  of  Foreign  Relations, 

In  fhe  house  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States,  Jan.  29,  1813. 

EXTRACTS. 

^  The  U.  States  having  engaged  in  the  war  for  the  folc  purpofe  of 
vindicating  their  rights  and  honor,  that  motive  alone  fhould  animate 
them  to  its  clofe.  It  becomes  a  free  and  virtuous  people  to  give  an  ufe- 
ful  example  to  the  world.  It  is  the  duly  of  a  reprefentativc  govern- 
ment to  render  a  faithful  account  of  its  conduct  to  its  conftituents. 
A  juft  fenfibility  to  great  and  unprovoked  wrongs  and  indignities  will 
nillify  an  appeal  to  arms  ;  an  honorable  reparation  &ould  reftore  the 
bleflings  of  peace  -,  every  ftep  which  they  take,  (hould  be  guided  by  a 
facred  regard  to  principle. 

Your  committee  has  feen  with  much  fatisfaction  that  at  the  moment 
of  the  declaration  of  war,  the  attention  of  the  Executive  was  engag- 
ed in  an  effort  to  bring  it  #3  a  fpeedy  and  honorable  termination.  As 
early  as  the'twentv-fixth  of  Tune  laft.  tlie  Charo-n  dps  AfFaJrs  of  i-hf  TT. 
btates  at  London  wasmflructed  to  propofc  to  the  Britifh  government  an 
armiftice,  to  take  an  immediate  effect,  on  conditions  which  it  it  believed 
the  iiripartial  world  will  confider  faf>  honorable  and  advantageous  to  G. 
Britain.  They  were  few  in  number  and  limited  to  ppfitive  wrongs  d^i- 
ly  practifed.    That  the  orders  in  council  fhould  be  repealed,  and  that 


s  22 

our  flag  (hould  protect  our  fcamcn,  were  the  only  indifpenable  ccndi- 
tiom  infiftcd  on.  Other  wrongs,  however  great,  were  poilponed  tor 
liable  ne^^^^^^  As  an  mducement  to  the  Britifli  government  to 

forbear  the  f«  wrongs,  it  was  propofed  to  repeal  the  nun. importation  law, 
and  to  prohibit  the  employment  of  iiritilh  fcamen,in  the  publtcand  pn- 
vate  veSels  of  the  U.  States  j  particular  care  was  taken  that  thclc  pro- 
Bofitions  ihould  be  made  ui  a  form  as  conciliatory,  as  they  were  amica- 

Vou^committce  cannot  avoid  exprelhng  its  aftoniniment  at  the  man. 
ncr  in  which  they  were  teccived.  It  was  not  luincient  to  rej^c  /h^ 
propofed  armiftice  i  terms  of  peculiar  uprcach  aud  tnjuU   were  adopted  ta 

make  the  reje5lion  ojfetifive,      '  ,       ,.  i   .u^rr  ^;M^^Q  af- 

It  happened,  th  it  almoft  on  the  fame  day,  m  which  the  U,  States,  al- 
ter having  been  worn  out  with  accumulated  wrongs,  had  rclorted  to  tlie 
laftan.l  only  remaining  honorable  alternative  in  fupport  oi  their  rigius, 
the  Britilh  government  had  repealed,  conditionally,  its  orders  m 
council.  That  mcafure  was  unexpected,  bccaufe  every  application  tor 
it  had  failed,  although  repeated  to  the  very  moment  it  was  decided  on. 
Conditional  as  the  repeal  was,  it  was  admitted  to  have  removed  a  great 
obitacle  to  accommodation.  .        r-         tr       ^     u^rccnrn. 

The  other  only  remained  :  the  practice  of  imprelTment.  It  was  pro- 
pofed to  the  Britlfh  gorernment  to  open  an  amicable  negociation  to  pro- 
vide a  fubftitute  to  it,  which  fhould  be  confidcred  an  ample  equivtilent. 
The  subftitute  propofed  was  defined,and  of  a  character  fo  comprehenlive* 
as  to  have  removed,  as  wis  prefumed,  every  P««"'b'«,°^J^^^*;?,^n\"^'  '^^^^ 
commodation.  The  propofition  before  made  to  exclude  ^^^^h  fcamen 
from  our  fervice  ivas  ettlarged.fo  as  to  comprehend  all  naUv.e  •^/'¥-'  /'  *; 
jeai  mi  already  naturalized  or  entitled  to  naturalization  under  the  lanvi  oj  the 
U.  S.  s    this  was  likewife  rejtited. 

Your  committee  have  fought  with  anxiety  fome  proof  ^^  » .d»^P°5'-'?" 
in  the  BritiOi  government,  to  accommodate  on  any  tair  condition  the  im- 
portant  difference  between  the  two  nations,  relative  to  ^n^f^A^^^^^^^^ 
[hey  have  fought  in  vain  ,  none  is  to  be  found  either  m  the   communi- 
cations  of  thelSritilh  minider  to  the  Amencau   Charge  des  Affairs  a 
London,  or  in  thofe  of  tlie  commander  o*.  the   Brmfl.  naval   forces  at 
Halifax  made  bv  order  of  his  government  to  the  Ueiv.utment  ot   Mate. . 
?Sy  Lve  f^en  wTth  regret,  tf at  although  I^rd  CaiU.reaoh  profefied  a 
willLnefs  in  his  government  to  receive  ami  diicufs  amicably  any  pro- 
pof  Kaving  In  view  either  to  check  abufe  in  the  practice  of  impreff- 
ment  or  to  prSvide  a  fubftitute  to  it,  he  not  only  decUued  entering   ^nioa 
negociationforthepurpofe.but  d^fcountenanced  ^^^'^,y/'^^^f^%f^j,^.;(^,  {"^f' 
tute  could  be  propofed,  which  his  government  ivuild  accept      It  merits  notice 
alfo.  tWh  it  ceafed  to  be  a  t.ufe  of  furprize,  that  m  the  communtca- 
tbn  of  Admiral  Warren  to  the  !>->  ittment  of  State,  the  fubject  of  mi- 

preffment  was  not  even  alluded  ai  ^  i  «f  fi,^ 

Had  the  Executive  confemc...or^^nmftice   on   ^he   'repeal  ot   the 

orders  in  council,  without  a  fail^factory  provifion  againft  impreiiment, 
or  a  clear  and  diftinct  underftanding  with  the  i3ritiiii  governmenc  lu  .au. 
effect,  in  fome  mode  entitled  to  confidence,  your  committee  would  not 
have  hefitated  to  difapprove  it.  .        .,  r  ^      ^         •     • 

The  impreffment  of  our  feamen  being  defervedly  confuered  a  princi- 
pal caufe  of  the  war,  the  war  ought  to  be  profecutcd  until  that  caufe  be 


«  ^ 


it 


the 


not 


removed.  To  appeal  to  arms  in  defence  of  a  right  and  to  lay  thcnn 
down  without  fecuring  it,  or  a  fatistactory  evidence  of  a  good  difpofition 
in  the  oppofite  party  to  fecurc  it,  would  be  confidered  in  no  other  light, 
than  a  relinquilhmcnt  of  it.  To  attempt  to  negociate  afterwards,  for 
the  fecurity  of  fuch  right,  in  the  expectation  that  any  of  the  arguments, 
which  have  been  urged  before  the  declaration  of  war  and  been  rejected, 
would  have  more  weight,  after  that  experiment  had  been  made  in  vain, 
would  be  an  act  of  foUy  which  would  not  fail  to  expofc  us  to  the  fcorn 
and  deririon  of  the  britiih  nation  an''  ot  the  world. 

On  a  full  view  therefore  of  the  conduct  of  the  Executive  in  its  tranf- 
actions  with  the  Britifti  government  fince  the  declaration  of  war,  the 
committee  confider  it  their  duty  to  exprefs  their  etittre  approbation  of  it. 
1  hey  perceive  in  it  a  firm  refoluticn  to  fupport  the  rights  and  honor  of  their 
country^  with  afncere  and  covimcndahle  liifpoftuon  to  promote  peace^  on  fuch 
jujl  and  honorable  conditirns  as  the  U.  S.  may  iviih/afety  accept. 

Itrcn.ains  therefore  for  the  U.  States  to  take  their  final  attitude  with 
G  Britain,  and  to  maintain  it  with  confiltency,  and  with  unfhaiven  hrm- 
net"'^  md  conftancy. 

The  British  government  has  infifted  that  every  American  citizen 
fhould  carry  with  him  tlie  tvidcnce  of  his  citizenfhip,  and  all  thofe  not 
pofleffed  of  it  might  be  imprefled.  This  criterion,  if  not  otherwife  ob- 
jectionable, would  be  fo,  as  the  document  might  be  loft,  deftroyed  or 
taken  from  the  party  to  whom  it  was  granted,  nor  might  it  in  all  cafes 
be  entitled  to  refpect,  as  it  might  be  counterfeited,  transferred,  or  grant- 
ed to  improper  perfons.  But  this  rule  is  liable  to  other  and  much  Itrong- 
er  objections.  On  what  p»-inciple  does  the  Britifti  government  claim  of 
the  U.  States  fo  great  andjhamefu/a  degradation  ?  Ought  the  free  citizens 
of  an  independent  power  to  carry  with  them  on  the  main  ocean,  and  in  their 
own  vejfclsi  the  evidence  cf  their  freedom  F  ^nd  are  all  to  be  conjidered  Britifh 
fubjeils  and  liable  t»  impreffntnt  who  do  not  bear  with  them  that  badge  ?  Is 
it  not  moie  confiftent  with  every  idea  both  of  public  as  well  as  ofprivate 
right,  that  the  party  fctting  up  a  claim  to  any  intereft,  whether  it  be  to 
perfons  or  property,  fliouM  prove  his  right  ?  What  would  be  the  con- 
duct of  G.  Britain  under  fimilar  circumftances  ?  Would  fhe  permit  the 
public  fliips  of  any  other  power,  difregarding  the  rights  of  their  flag,  to 
enter  on  board  her  merchant  vcflels,  take  from  them  fuch  part  of  their 
crews,  as  the  boarding  officers  thought  fit,  often  her  own  fubjects,  ex- 
pofing  by  means  thereof  their  veflels  to  dcftruction  ^.  Would  ihe  fufFer 
fu  ;h  m  ulurpation  to  derive  any  fanction  from  her  patient  forbearance  ? 

With  the  Britifli  claim  to  imprefs  Britifh  feamen,  the  U.  States  have 
no  right  to  interfere,  provided  it  be  in  Britifli  veflels  or  any  other  than 
.thofe  of  the  U.  States  *i hat  Americftn  citizens JJjould  be  exempt  from  its 
cperaiiony  is  all  that  they  demand.  Experience  has  (liewn  that  this  cannot 
be  fecured  otherwife,  than  by  the  veflel  in  which  they  fail.  Take  from 
the  American  citizens  this  harrier ^  which  ought  to  be  held  farredy  and  there  is 
nrthing  to  protect  them  againfl  the  rapacious  grafp  of  the  Briu/h  navy.  This 
then  13  the  extent  of  the  demand  of  the  U.  States,  a  demand  fo  juft  in 
itielf,  io  confident  and  inieparabie  from  their  rights,  as  an  independent 
nation,  that  it  has  been  a  caufe  of  aftonifhmeiit,  that  it  fhould  ever 
have  been  called  in  queftion.  The  foundation  of  the  Britifli  claim  is, 
that  Britifh  feamen  find  employment  in  the  fervice  of  the  U.  States  ; 
this  is  reprefented  as  an  evil  affecting  effentially  the  great  interefts  of 


24 

'*he  iritifti  nation.  This  compliment  would  have  more  ^veight  if  fane- 
tnfd  bTth'f  Britifh  example.  !t  is  known  on  the  contrary,  that  it  is 
niect^repugnancetoit.  G.  Britain  Hoes  not  fcruple  to  rec.ivc  into 
her  ftrv  ce  alfwho  enter  into  it  voluntarily.  If  ihe  confined  herfelf 
tlthin  that  1  imu  controvcrfy  would  not   exift.    Heretofore 

rAb  ects  oTeien  the  moft  dcfpotic  powers  have  be.n  left  at  hbert) 
toVurfie  their  6wn  happiness,  by  honeft  induftry,  wherever  their  inch- 

""'fTe^Biit^^^^^^^  refufes  to  its  feamen  that  privilege.    Let  not 

this   thenVbe  a  ground  of  controverfy  with  that  nation.    Let  it  be  dif- 

ttcdfund^^^^^^  ^%"^^^^'  ^t 

ween  the  two  nations,  whereby  each  fhould  exclude  from  its  fei vice  the 
Sizen    and^fubjectsof  tl^^  the  principles  and  conditions  above 

Serthat  thishoufe  will  be  prepared,  fo  far  as  depends  on  it,  to  give 
it  effect  and  for  that  purpofe  to  enact  laws,  with  fuch  regulations  and 
;en!?t  "will  be  ad'equate-  With  this  pledge,  it  is  -tperceived  on 
what  cround  the  Britiih  government  can  perfift  m  its  claim.  If  Britith 
Smef  are  excluded  fromShe  fcrvice  of  the  J.  States  as  may  be  eflec- 
tuaUv  done'^he  foundation  of  the  claim  muft  ceafe.  When  it  is  known 
twLt  one  Britiih  feaman  could  be  found  o^  American   v.iTeis, 

f  ITld  bTaE  to  urge  that  fact  as  a  motive  for  fuch  impreffment. 
In  declaring  a  willingnefs  to  give  effect  to  the  propofed  arrangemenc, 
vourrommitree  confidlr  it  equally  the  duty  of  the  houfe  to  dectare  m 
SmsX  moft  decifive,  thatihould  the  Bniifti  government  ftill  decline 
t  ?nd  per?^ere  in  the  practice  of  impreftinent  from  American  veffels, 
the  U  States  will  never  acquiefe  in  that  practice,  but  wil  refill  it  un- 
langlywfrall  their  for^  It  is  not  neceffary  to  !n<l^V'%KT  oVert 
iou  would  have  b..n  with  refpect  t  impreffmcnt,  in  cafe  the  orders 
in  coun.  ^ad  been  repealed  before  the  declaration  of  war-or  how  long 
the  practice  •  "  =mpreffment  would  have  been  borne,  m  the  hope  that 
tK^^^^^^^  followed  by  a  fatisfactory  aTrangement   w.th  ref- 

^%,':^^^Z:n  A^cUre^,  and  the  cafe  of  imprcffment  being -ceffa- 
rilv  included  as  one  of  the  moft  important  caufes,  it  is  evident  tha    it 
muirbe  provided  for  m  the  pacification.     The  omSon  of  tt  j»  a  treaty/ 
ifceXo^ddntt  Uaveit  on  it:  former  ground  ;    it  'Would:n  efff  bean   atjo- 
^Z  rlZllhrnent,   an  idea  at '.vhich  the  feelings  of  every  ^,«.;-..vm  ^««/? 
TeLlh  feamen  of  the  U.  S.  have  a  clattn  on  ihetr  country  fir  proteBion, 
andLmu/beprctekd.     Ifafingleftiip  istaken  at  fea,  and  the  property 
San  imerican  citizen  arretted  from  him  unjuftly,.  loufes  the  indig- 
nation o?the  country.    How  much  more  deeply  then  ought  we  to  be 
€scked   when  we  behold  fo  many  of  this  g.llant  and  highly  meritorious 
claTof  our  fellow  citizens  fnatched  from  tlielr  families  and  country  and 
carried  into  a  cruel  and  afflicting  bondage.    It  is  an  evil  which  ou^t  not, 
whkh  cTnnot  be  longer  toleratJd.    Without  dwelling  on  the   fuftenngs 

wnicn  cannot  uc  lunj^t*         ^        x.n-^^r.  r.rh\rh  \t  fnrparfs  amonc 

of  the  victims,  or  on  tne  wiac  i^c.^;.  ut  ^.......  .......  :  ,-^;y ;  ,  ^  i  •  i" 

their  telatives  through  the  country,  the  practice  is  m  itfelf  in  the  high- 
esrSe  degrading  to  the  U.  States  as  a  nation.  It  is  incompatible  with 
SeirfSlnty--kisfubverriveofthemain  pillars  of  their  maepen- 
dence.    The^foJbearance  of  the  U.  States  under  it  has  been  miilaken  for 

^"mBtidlh  pret^nfion was  maturing  faft  into  a  right.    Hadrefiftanc* 


^ 


m 


X.         -  ««*.      Everv  admifttratiqr^ 
been  longer  delayed,  it  f«^g^^  ^^V^^jf^XJ^'the  gr^^^^ 
remonftrated  againft  k, m  a  ^Iccs  proS       effect,  'u  was.J^or, 
nf  the  country?   Their  remonftrancps  P'^o^^^^^r  .  u    ^^e  vticc  of  his 
1  tL  i  Sous  leader  of  our  arm;e.,  -^^^^^^^^^^  repommen^ 

coLtry  to  the  head  of  the  go^^^^^f^^'^Cv  had  recovered  from  .the 
to  hi     ellow-citizens  a  "^w  war    before  tl^Y  had    ^^.^^^  ^^  ^^ 

calamities  of  the  late  one.     It  ^J^/  7//^^^^     government  would  gain 
follow  his  example.    I"  P^^?^  ^  ^'^^^* V'^^^^^^^  But  at   the  laft 

ftrcngth,  and  our  happy  union  ^econ^e  conlqUdate^       be  no  longer  juf- 
Mof.,  tke  period  had  -rived  when  orbe^^^^^^^^^  ^^^ject  in  cQnnex.or, 
tified.     It  was  the  duty  of  fongrels  o  m      P^^j^^^^  ^^d  to  feek  re-         ^ 
with  the  other  great  ^^^"g?  fc^^^^h^^^  of  a  tree  peo- 

arefs  in  the  only  "^^«<i^,\^^l^S^o  arm^,  and  that  appeal  will  be 
pie  —They  have  done  fo  by  appeahng  to  arms, 

Supported  by  their  conftituents.  •  ..^.fting  crifis  has  arrived  in  the        , 

Your  committee  are  aware  that  f ^^"J^f^^^^^^^^      ^f  its   confequences.       '! 
U.  States,  but  they  have  no  paipfuUpprehe^^^^^  ^   ^^^,^ 

The  covjrfe  before  them  is  dirept.    It  is  P^"^^^^.  ^    i?we  iurfuait  with        | 
cfthelUr,  the  rights  and  mer^^^^^ 

firmnefs  and  vigor,  relying  on  the  aid  Qhc^v     ,         ^^^  a 

Our  refources  arc  abundan  ^^^P^^I^^^  ^  ^^f.^t  navy  befpeaks  our 
their  fpiritunbrokep.  ^^^  g^"^""'  V.i,^.  of  our  troops  when  led  to 
crow  ng  greatnefs  pn  that  element,  and  that  of  our  ro  p^ 

EXTRACTS  OF  THE  MO.T  ^'^^J^'^^^f^To}  .1"  "«!'"' 
v^hhin  the  United  States,  ^^'^^  »'"?* .°/;  "^nt  on  to  ^ 

r„  t  Sued  under  the  sa«  «Ha';°"/'  '"^J:,  ,^^S  «b.m  >ucl.  obj«..»n) 
proofs  of  the  nativity  or  citiienship  <•!  tue  person  ,   .. 


26 

may  have  been  made,   shall  be  invesiigafed  by   sucli  commander  or  collector. 

And  be  it  furthrr  enacted^  That  if  any  ccrnmander  of  a  public  vessel  of  tJie 
United  States,  shall  employ,  or  permit  to  be  employed,  or  shall  admit  or  receive, 
or  permit  to  be  admitted,  or  received  on  board  his  vessel,  any  person  whose  em- 
ployrnent  or  admission  is  prohibited  by  the  provisions  of  this  act,  he  shall,  on 
conviction  thereof,  forfeit  and  pay  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars  for  each 
person  thus  unlawfully  employed,  or  admitted  on  board  such  vessel. 

And  be  it  further  enacted^  That  the  provisions  of  this  act,  shall  have  no  effect 
or  operation  with  respect  to  the  employment  as  seamen,  of  the  subjects  or  citizens 
of  any  toreijrn  nation,  which  shall  not  have  forbidden  on  board  her  public  and 
private  vessels  the  employment  as  seamen  or  other  vfise  of  native  citizens  of  the 
United  States  j  or  who  shall  permit  the  commanders  of  her  public  vessels  to  im- 
press or  take  away  from  on  board  any  vessel  sailing  under  the  flag  of  the  United 
States,  any  seaman  or  any  other  person,  not  being  a  soldier  or  otherwise  in  the 
employment  of  an  enemy  of  such  nation. 

REMARK. 
It  is  a  little  remarkable  that  this  Bill,  whose  only  objeft  and  tendency  is 
a  refloration  of  peace  with  England,  fhould  have  been  prepared  by  the  /?<?- 
pubUcnn  Committee  of  Foreign  Relations  ;  and  that  in  the  Houfa  of  Repre- 
fentatives,  it  was  fupported  and  paffed  by  a  large  majority  of  Republican 
members.  And,  when  the  bill  was  confidered  in  the  Senate  a  federal  member* 
moved  a  poftponment  to  the  next  Congrefs,  which  is  well  known  to  mean, 
in  other  words,  a  total  rejedion  of  it  ;  and,  upon  that  queftion,  ftrange  as  it 
may  appear,  every  member  of  the  Federal  party  'voted  against  the  bill.  And  is 
not  this  demonftration,  that  at  leaft  many  of  the  Federalifts,  contrary  to 
their  profeffions,  are  not  the  friends  of  peace  ;  and  that  the  republicans  are 
defirous  of  an  accommodation  with  England,  fo  foon  as  it  can  be  made, 
without  a  facrifice  of  the  vital  interefts  and  honor  of  the  American  Repub- 
lic. The  bill,  however,  pafTed  in  the  Senate,  notwithftanding  Federal  op- 
pofition.  *Mr.  Lloyd  from  Maffachufetts. 


Extracts  from  Mr.  Clay's  Speech^  in  the  last  Congress^  on  the 

new  Army  Bill. 

The  war  was  declared  becaufe  Great  Britian  arrogated  to  herfelf  the 
pretention  of  regulating  our  foreign  trade,  under  the  delufive  name  of 
retaliatory  orders  in  council — a  pretention  by  which  fhe  undertook  to 
proclaim  to  American  enterprize,  «  Thus  far  fhalt  thou  go,  and  no  far- 
ther,"— orders  which  fhe  refufed  to  revoke  after  the  alledged  caufe  of 
their  enacStment  had' ceafed  i  becaufe  Ihe  perfifted  in  the  practice  of 
imprefling  American  feamen  j  becaufe  Ihe  had  inftigated  the  Indians  to 
commit  hoftilities  againft  us  ;  and  becaufe  fhe  refufed  indemnity  for  her 
paft  injuries  upon  our  commerce.  I  throw  out  of  the  queflion  other 
wrongs.  The  war  in  fa«Sl:  was  announced,  on  our  part,  to  meet  the  war 
which  fhe  was  waging,  on  her  part.      So  undeniable  were  the  caufes  of 

<-Vio  «Ti*.^_^r,-.  r"^-"--^--!  J- J  ■ti-s— t-  f-.l-!-£i/^  4-1 /"-i ^~  ^t- -  r--i; -r  iU_ 

,,,._.   „„i xw  ^-•w.cii.ui  uxsj  liicy  auuifis  tuciiucivca  lu  Llic  iCL'iilJgS    OI  m© 

whole  American  people,  that  when  the  bill  was  pending  before  this 
Houfe,  gentlemen  in  the  oppofition,  although  provoked  to  debate, 
would  not,  or  could  not,  utter  one  fyllable  againft  it  It  is  true  they 
wrapped  themfelves  up  in  fullen  lllence,  pretending  that  they  did  not 
ehoofe  to  debate  fuch  a  queftion  in  fecret  feflion.     Whilft  fp«aking  of 


) 


27 


'^ 


" 


f 


'i 


the  proceedings  on  that  occafion,  I  beg  to  be  permitted  to  advert  to  an- 
other ha  that  transpired —an  important  faa,  material  for  the  nation  to 
know,  and  which  I  have  often  regretted  had  not  been  fpread  upon  our 
journals.  My  honorable  colleague  (Mr.  M'Kee)  moved,  m  committee 
of  the  whole,  to  comprehend  France  in  the  war;  and  when  the  quel- 
tion  was  taken  upon  the  propofition,  there  appeared  but  ten  votes  in  iup- 
port  of  it,  of  whom  seven  belonged  to  this  fide  of  the  House,  and  three  only   to 

the  other.*  .  ,         .  .,  , 

I  am  far  from  acknowledging,  that  had  the   orders  in  council  been 
refcinded,  as  they  have  been,  before  the   war  was  declared,   the  decla- 
ration would  have  been  prevented.     In  a  body   fo   numerous   as   this, 
from  which  the  declaration  emanated,  it  is  impoffible  to  fay  with  any 
decree  of  certainty,  what  would  have  been  the  efFea  of  fuch  a  repeal. 
Each  member  muft  anfwer  for  himfelf.     I  have  no  hefitation  then  in 
faying,  that  I  have  always  confidered  the  impreffment  of  American  lea- 
men  as  much  th«  moil  ierious  aggreffion.     But,  fir,  how  have  thofe  or- 
ders at  laft  been  repealed  ?  Great  Britain,  it  is  true,   has  intimated  a 
willingnefs  to  fufpend  their  praftical  operation,  but  fhe  ftill  arrogates  to 
herfelf  the  right  to  revive  them  upon  certain  contingencies,  of  which 
fhe  conftitutes  herfelf  the  fole  judge.     She  waves  the  temporary  ule  ot 
the  rod,  but  fhe  fufpends  it  in  terrorem  over  our  heads,     buppohng  it 
was  conceded  to  gentlemen,  that  fuch  a  repeal  of  the  orders  m  council 
as  took  place  on  the  23d  of  June  laft,  exceptionable  as  it  is,  being  known 
before  the  war,   would  have  prevented  the  war,  does  it  follow  that  it 
ought  to  induce  us  to  lay  down  our  arms,  without  the  redrefs  of  any 
other  injury  ?  Does  it  follow,  in  all  cafes  that  that  which   would  have 
prevented  the  war,  in  the  firft  inftance,  Oiould  terminate  the  war  ?  By 
no  means.     It  requires  a  great  ftruggle  for  a  nation,prone  to  peace  as  this 
is,  to  burft  through  its  habits  and  encounter   the  difficulties  of  wan- 
Such  a  nation  ought  but  feldom  to  go  to  war.  /When  it  does,  it  fhou  d 
be  for  clear  and  effential  rights  alone,  and  it  fhould  hrmly   relolve   to 
extort,  at  all  hazards,  their  recognition. 

The  war  of  the  revolution  is  an  example  of  a  war  began  for  one  ob- 

iea  and  profecuted  for  another.     It  was  waged,  in  its  commencement, 

acainft  the-  right  aiferted  by  the  parent  country  to  tax  the  colonies. 

Then  no  one  thought  of  abfolute  independence.     The  idea  of  inde- 

pendence  was  repelled. -But  the  Britiih  government  would  have  relin- 

quifhed  the  principle  of  taxation.     Thrj  founders  of  our  liberties  faw, 

however,   that  there  was  no  fecurity  Ihort  of  independence,  and  they 

achieved  our  independence.     When  nations  are  engaged  in  war,   thole 

rights  in  controverfy,  which  are  not  acknowleged  by  the  treaty  ot  peace, 

are   abandoned.     And  who    is  prepared  to  fay  that  American  feamen 

Ihall  be  furrendered,  the  victims  to  the  Britiih  principle  of  impreliment .' 

And.  fir,  what  is  this  principle  ?     She  contends  that  ihe  has  a  nght  to 

the  lervices  of  her  own  lubjeas  j  that,  in  the  exercife  of  mis  nght,  ne 

may  lawfully  imprefs  them,  even  ahhough  fhe  finds  them  in  our  velTels. 

upon  the  high  feas,  without  her  juriiUiaion.     Now,  1  deny  tmt  she  hss 

*  Seven  Republicans  und  three  Tederulifis. 


^i 


Wtiy  right  without  her  JunsdictiofJj  to  come  on  hoard  our  vessels  upon  the  high 
ieasijor  any  other  purpose  but  in  pursuit  of  enemies ^  or  their  goods ^  or  good's 
'contraband  of  war.     But  fhe  further  contends,  that  her  fubj efts  cannot 
denounce  their  allegiance  to  her  and  contract  a  new  obligation  to  other 
'fovereigns.     1  do  not  mean  to  go  into  the  general  quellion  of  the  right 
of  expatriation.f     If,  as  is  contended,  all  nations  deny  it,  all  nations  at 
ih6  ifame  time  admit  and  practice  the  right  of  naturalization.     G.  Britain 
Herfelf  does.     G.  Britain,   in  the  very  cafe  of  foreign  feamen,  impofes, 
perhaps,  fewer  feftraints  upon  naturalization  than  any  other  nation. 
Then,  if  fubje«^s  cannot  break  their  original  allegiance,  they  niay,   ac- 
cording to   univerfal  ufage,  contract  a  new  allegiance.     What  is  the 
eiffeft  of  this  double  obligation  ?  Undoub'tedljr  that  the  fovereign  hav- 
ing the  poffeffion  of  the  fubje(Et  would  have  the  right  to  th6  fervices  of 
Iheiubject.     If  he  return  within  the  jurifdiftion  olF  his  primitive  fov- 
ereign, he  may  relume  his  right  to  his  fervices,  of  which  the  fubjecStby 
ills  own  aa,  could  not  diveft  hirnfelf.     But  this  primitive  fovereign  can 
have  no  right  to  go  in  queftof  him,  oiit  of  his  own  jurifdiftion,  into  the 
Jurisdiaioh  of  another  fovereign  or  upon  the  high  feas,  where  there  exifts 
either  ho  jurifdiaioh,  or   it  belongs   to   the  nation   owning  the  fliip 
Navigating  them.     But,  fir,  this   difcufiion   is  altogether   ufelefs.     It 
is  hot  to  the  Britifli  principle,  objeaionable  as  it  is,  that  we  are  alone 
io  look— it  is  to  her  praaice— ho  matter  what  guife  flie  puts  on — 
It  is  in  vain  to  aliert  the  inviolability  of  the  obligation  of  allegiance.— 
It  is  in  vain   to   fet  lip  the  plea  of  neceffity,  ahd   to  ailed ge  that  fhe 
tannot  exift  without  the  imprelTmeht   of  HER   feihien.     The  naked 
truth  is,  fhe  conies,  by  her  prefs-gangi,  on  board  of  our  vefTels,  feizes 
bUR    native  feamen,   as  well   as   naturalized,  and   drags   them  intd 
her  fervice.     It  is  the  cafe,  then,  of  the  alTertion  of  ah  erroneous  prin- 
ciple— and  a  praaice  not  conformable  to  the  principle — a  J)rincipie 
which,  if  it  were  theoretically  right  muft  be  for  ever  praaically  wrong. 
We  are  told,  by  gentlemen  in  the  oppbfitioh,  that  government  has  not 
"done  all  that  was  incumbent  oh  it  to  do,  to  avoid  ju'ft   caufe  of  con\- 
plaiiU  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain— that,  in  particular,  the  certificates 
of  proteaion,  authorifed  by  the  aa  of  1796,  are  fraudulently  ufed.— 
Sir,  government  has  done  too  much  in  granting  thofe  paper  proteaions. 
1  can  never  think  of  them  without  being  fliocked.     They  referable  the 
pafTes  which  the  mafler  grants  to  his  negro  flaVe,  "Let   the  bearer, 
Mungo,  pafs  and  repafs,  witnout  moleftation."     What  do  they  imply  ? 
That  Great  Britain  has  a  right  to  take  ail  who  are  not  provided  with 
them.     Froln   their  very  nature  they  muft  be  liable  to  abufe  on  both 
fides.     If  Great  Britain  defires  a  mark  by  which  flie  can  know  her  own 
fubjeas,   let  her  give  them  an  ear  mark.     The  colors  that   float  from 
the  malt  head  fhould   be  the  credentials  of  our  feamen.     There  is  no 
4\fa.t,T  «■«  ,ir.    ^^A  4-v.^  /,-pr»fl»t>-ion  Invo   fhpwn  it,  hilt  in  the   rule  that  all 
who  sail  under  the  flag  (not  being  enemies)  are  proteaed  by  the  flii-g. 
It  is  impoflible  that  this  country  fllould  ever  abandon  the  gallant  tars, 
\^ho  have  won  for  us  fuch  fplendid  trophies. 


pi 

ti 


a 


a 
s 


t  "cc  Note  at  the  end  of  the  paifnphkt  for  aiitlibrlties  on  the  right  of  Ekpatria- 


id 

REMARK, 
th^  pretended  claim  of  Great  Britain  to  Impress  liieft  bn 
board  of  our  ships  at  sea,  is  so  totally  groundless  in  princi^ 
pie,  that  it  excites  the  ridicule  even  of  her  own  subjects.  As 
evidence  of  this,  the  following  is  extracted  from  the  late  wri- 
tings of  a  distinguished  politician  of  that  country  :-^ 

"  We  have  heard  (says  he)  much  talking  about  these  inar- 
*«  itime  rights  of  Great  Britain  ;  but  I  have  never  ye^t^eard 
«»  one  man  clea  ^^  state  what  he  means  by  them.  The  A- 
"  merican  Government  say,  that  we  have  no  right  to  stop 
« their  -vessels  at  sea,  and  take  people  out  of  them  y  and  1 
"  say  that  this  is  a  right  that  Great  Britain  never  before  eon- 
»*  tended  for  ;  and  I  defy  any  man  to  shew  that  any  neutral 
"  nation  in  the  world  ever  submitted  to  such  a  practice,  or 
"  that  such  a  practice  was  ever  attempted.' 

If  the  subjects  of  Britain  be  her  slaves,  let  her  treat  them 
as  such.  In  the  language  of  our  Speaker  in  Congress,  "if 
She  desire  a  mark,  by  which  she  can  know  them,  let  her 
give  them  an  ear  mark.  The  colcJrs  that  float  from  the  mast 
head  should  be  the  credentials  oiour  seamen." 

The  practice  of  enslaving  our  citizens  by  impressment,  and 
of  requiring   written  protections   about  their  persons,   are 
marks  of  national  degradation,  to  which  America  ought  not, 
and  can  Hot,  longer  submit.     She  has  once  caused  her  Inde- 
pendence to  be  acknowledged,  and  she  is  now  impatient  to 
be  free  in  reality^  and   to  assume  her  equal  rank  among  the 
nations  of  the  earth.    And  we  trust  in  God  !  there  is  a  re- 
deeming spirit  in  the  people*  which,  having  once  triumphed 
over  England,  will  not  stop  short  at  the  acquisition  of  half 
their  Independence.    Thi?  badge  of  vassalage  must  be  thrown 
off;  this  stain  upon  our  national  honor  must  be  wiped  away ; 
and  the  time  will  come,  and  is  fast  approaching,  when  the  A- 
merican  name  will  be  respected  throughout  the  world ;  when 
our   mariners  shall   sail  the  ocean  without   any  other  pro- 
tection than  the  flag  that  flies  over  them  ;  and  when  the  ex- 
clamation "/  am  an  American  ciiizeii'  shall  ensure,  m  all  parts 
of  the  globe,  freedom  and  safety  to  every  member  x)f  this  ex- 
tensive and  growing  republic. 


PI* 


,i 


80 

taOTE — to  page  28. 

The  foltdwlng  are  fome  among  the  numerous  authorities,  proving 
the  natura'l  and  twalienablc  right  of  Expatrtatio?t  : 

An  opinion  upon  the  fubject  of  naturalization  has  been  forntaHy  and 
judicially  pronounced  in  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  of  the  U.  States, 
m  the  cafe  of  Talbot  vs.  Janfon,  as  follows — 

Judge  Irfdell. — "  Perhaps  it  is  not  necessary  that  it  (right 
of  expatriation)  should  be  expressly  decided  on  this  occasion, 
but  I  will  freely  express  my  sentiments  on  liiat  subject.  That 
n  man  ought  not  to  be  a  slaue^  that  he  should  not  be  confined 
against  his  will  to  a  particular  spot,  because  he  happened  to 
draw  his  first  breath  upon  it ;  that  he  should  not  be  compelled 
to  continue  in  a  society,  to  which  he  is  accidentally  attached, 
when  he  can  better  his  situation  elsewhere,  much  less  when  he 
must  starve  in  one  country,  and  may  live  comfortably  in  an- 
other, are  positions  which  I  hold  as  strongly  as  any  man,  and 
they  are  such  as  most  nations  in  the  world  appear  clearly  to  re- 
cognize" 

It  appears  from  hiftory,  that  the  Right  of  Expatriation  was  clearly 
acknowledged  and  eftablilhed  among  the  moft  antient  nations. 

The  law  of  the  Republic  of  Athens,  extracted  from  Potter's  Gr. 
An.  b.  1,  ch.  26. 

**It  is  permitted  to  every  Athenian,  after  having  become 
acquainted  with  the  laws  and  customs  of  the  Republic,  if  he 
dislike  them,  to  retire  with  his  family  and  goods." 

Law  of  Rome,  extracted  from  the  writings  of  Cicero,  the  Orator  : 

*^Glorioi/s  and  divine  right,  which  we  have  received  from 
our  ancestors  and  which  is  coeval  with  the  Roman  name, 
that  no  one  of  us  can  be  a  citizen  of  more  than  one  common- 
wealth, (since  different  states  must  of  necessity  have  differ- 
ent laws)  that  none  should  be  compelled  to  change  his  country 
against  his  will ;  and  none  against  his  will  to  remain  in  it. — 
This  is  the  firmest  foundation  of  our  liberty,  that  every  one  is 

fREE  to  retain  OR  DIVEST  HIMSELF  OF  THE  RIGHTS  OF  CITIZENSHIP  1 

Extract  from  the  Justinian  Code— Dig.  Lib.  49.  tit.  15. 
^'^E'very  otte  is  free  to  decide  for  himself  to  what  country  he 

will  belongP 

Thefe  three  authorities  are  fufficiently  conclufive,  as  to  the  laws  and 
practices  of  the  antients — And  with  the  antients  agree  an  the  moaera 
writers  of  any  eminence  upon  the  law  of  nature  and  nations. 

Extract  from  Ptijfendorf,  b.  3.  ch.  9.  iec.  3. 

"It  is  impossible  that  the  5>ame  subject  should  be  capable  of 


r 

/I 
\1 


31 


two  obligations  of  the  same  nature."  It  has  been  justly  coiit 
eluded,  therefore,  that  "Naturalization  necessarily  annuls  his 
first  allegiance'*  ^ 

Extracts  from  Vattel,h.  I,  ch  IQ. 

♦'A  nation  or  sovereign,  who  represents  it,  may  grant  to  a 
stranger  the  quality  of  a  citizen,  by  admitting  him  into  the 
body  of  the  political  society.     This  is  called  naturalization." 

"Every  man  is  born  free,  the  son  of  a  citizen,  arrived  at 
years  of  discretion,  may  examine  whether  i(|be  convenient 
for  him  to  join  in  the  society  for  which  he  was  destined  by 
his  birth.  If  he  finds  that  it  will  be  of  no  advantage  to  hint 
to  remain  in  it,  he  is  at  liberty  to  leave  it,  making  a  return  for 
what  is  done  in  his  favor,  and  preserving  as  much  as  his  new 
engagements  will  allow  him  the  sentiments  of  love  and  grat- 
itude he  owes  it. 

"//  the  so-vereign  attempts  to  stop  those,  who  ha-ve  the  righi 
of  emigration,  he  does  them  an  injury^  and  they  may  lawfully 
implore  the  protection  of  the  power,  who  would  receiue  them, 

"It  appears  from  several  historical  facts,  particularly  in  the 
history  of  Switzerland  and  the  neighboring  countries,  that 
the  law  of  nations  established  there  by  custom  for  some  ages 
past,  does  not  permit  a  state  to  receive  the  subjects  of  anoth- 
er into  the  number  of  its  citi;zens.     This  vicious  custom  had 

NO  OTHER  FOUNDATION  THAN  THE  SLAVERY  TO  WHICH  THE  PEOPLE 

WERE  THEN  REDUCED.  A  prince,  a  Lord,  considered  his  subject^ 
in  the  rank  of  his  property  and  riches,  he  calculated  their  tiurxh 
her  as  he  did  his  flocks  y  and  to  the  disgrace  of  human  nature 
this  strange  abuse  is  not  yet  every  where  destroyed" 

From  Grotlus,  lib.  1.  ch.  3.  fee.  4-1. 

"  It  is  no  violation  of  amity,  to  receive  subjects  individual- 
ly, who  are  desirous  of  emigrating  from  one  country  to  ano.- 
ther.  This,  as  v/e  have  formerly  shewn,  is  not  only  a  fiaiu- 
ral  but  a  salutary  liberty." 

According  to  Bynkershook— In  every  country  that  is  not 
a  prison,  the  right  of  expatriation  is  recognized  and  allowe4. 


